Madhya Pradesh High CourtHealth and Medical LawConstitutional Law

Minor rape victim’s reproductive autonomy permits pregnancy termination beyond the statutory twenty-four-week limit.

Victim Xv.The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Minor rape victim’s reproductive autonomy permits pregnancy termination beyond the statutory twenty-four-week limit.. Victim X vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether a minor rape victim has the right to terminate a pregnancy that has exceeded the statutory 24-week limit prescribed under the MTP Act

The court held

The High Court allowed the petition and permitted the termination of the pregnancy

It also directed

The court directed the Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal, to immediately assemble a specialized team of doctors to perform the procedure after explaining the risks to the family

the State must provide all post-operative care and take custody of the child if born alive, should the parents decline to keep it

the child shall remain with the victim for 15 days for breastfeeding before being handed to the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) for adoption

doctors must preserve a fetal tissue sample for DNA evidence for the criminal trial

the victim’s privacy must be strictly maintained

The petition was disposed of with these directions

01Facts

The petitioner, the father of a 15-year-old minor ("Victim X"), sought a writ of mandamus for the termination of his daughter's pregnancy

¶ 1

The victim was a survivor of sexual assault and rape, leading to an FIR registered under Sections 65(1), 64(2)(m), 64(2)(f) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 5l/6 of the POCSO Act

¶ 2

A Medical Board report dated March 20, 2026, confirmed the gestational age exceeded 24 weeks (approximately 29 weeks), precluding termination under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Amendment Act, 2021, without a court order

¶ 3, 9

The Board noted that while termination at this late stage carried high-risk complications, the risks were comparable to a full-term pregnancy

¶ 3

Counseling reports confirmed that the victim and her parents consistently expressed their desire to terminate the pregnancy to protect the victim’s future and mental health

¶ 9

02Issues

i.1. Whether a minor rape victim has the right to terminate a pregnancy that has exceeded the statutory 24-week limit prescribed under the MTP Act

¶ 3-4

ii.2. Whether the reproductive autonomy and mental health of a rape victim outweigh the statutory restrictions of the MTP Act

¶ 6-8

iii.3. What protocols must be followed regarding the welfare of the child if born alive during a late-term termination

¶ 11

03Law Applied

The court relied on Sections 3 and 5 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (as amended in 2021), noting that while Section 3(2)(b) sets a 24-week limit, Section 3(4)(b) makes the pregnant woman's consent paramount

¶ 5, 8

The court applied the principle from Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn. (2009) 9 SCC 1, which recognized reproductive choice as a fundamental facet of Article 21 of the Constitution

¶ 6

It further cited A vs State of Maharashtra (2024) 6 SCC 327, emphasizing that the woman’s health and consent are paramount

¶ 6

X vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department (2022) SC 4917, which established that the woman is the ultimate decision-maker regarding her body

¶ 7

XYZ vs State of Gujarat (2023) SCC OnLine SC 1573, which permitted late-term termination for rape victims and provided guidelines for live births and DNA preservation

¶ 7

Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 65Section 64

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 Section 3Section 4Section 5

04Reasoning

The court reasoned that the right to make reproductive choices is intrinsic to the fundamental rights of privacy, dignity, and bodily integrity under Article 21

¶ 6

Despite the pregnancy exceeding 29 weeks—well beyond the 24-week statutory ceiling—the court found that forcing a minor rape victim to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term constitutes a "grave injury to her mental health"

¶ 5, 7

The court observed that the Medical Board’s report did not strictly prohibit the procedure but highlighted risks similar to full-term delivery

¶ 4

By integrating the victim's socio-economic conditions and the trauma of the assault revealed in the counseling reports, the court concluded that the victim’s autonomy must be upheld

¶ 9-10

The court balanced the state’s interest in the potential life of the fetus by providing directions for neonatal care and adoption should the fetus be born alive

¶ 7, 11

05Holding

The High Court allowed the petition and permitted the termination of the pregnancy

¶ 10

The court directed the Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal, to immediately assemble a specialized team of doctors to perform the procedure after explaining the risks to the family

¶ 10(i)-(iii)

the State must provide all post-operative care and take custody of the child if born alive, should the parents decline to keep it

¶ 10(iv), 11

the child shall remain with the victim for 15 days for breastfeeding before being handed to the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) for adoption

¶ 11

doctors must preserve a fetal tissue sample for DNA evidence for the criminal trial

¶ 10(v)

the victim’s privacy must be strictly maintained

¶ 11

The petition was disposed of with these directions

¶ 12
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Original Court PDF

Victim XvsThe State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · March 20, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment