Right to Medical Termination of Pregnancy for Minor Rape Victim Prevails Over Advanced Gestational Age.

In brief

The question

1. Whether a minor rape victim can be permitted to terminate a pregnancy exceeding the statutory limit of 24 weeks on the grounds of grave injury to mental health and the "best interest" of the victim.

The court held

The court answered in the affirmative, allowing the petition and directing the medical termination of the pregnancy

It also directed

The court ordered the Superintendent of GMERS Medical College, Valsad, to constitute a surgical team immediately

Specific directions were issued to preserve fetal tissue for DNA evidence [p. 8, para. 12(vi)], ensure the best medical care for the child if born alive, and mandate that the State assume responsibility for the child if the victim is unwilling

The petition was disposed of with a grant of direct service

01Facts

The applicant, a 16-year-old minor rape victim, filed a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, seeking directions for the termination of her pregnancy

p. 1

The pregnancy resulted from an alleged sexual assault, leading to an FIR registered at Dungra Police Station under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the POCSO Act, 2012

pp. 1-2

A medical board at GMERS Medical College, Valsad, examined the victim on 25.06.2026 and determined the gestational age to be 27 weeks and 5 days, opining that termination was feasible under the MTP Act guidelines

p. 2

02Issues

i.1. Whether a minor rape victim can be permitted to terminate a pregnancy exceeding the statutory limit of 24 weeks on the grounds of grave injury to mental health and the "best interest" of the victim.

p. 2 / para. 2, 10

ii.2. Whether the right to reproductive choice is an integral part of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution in cases of sexual assault.

p. 6 / para. 8

03Law Applied

The court primarily applied Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 (as amended in 2021), which presumes that pregnancy caused by rape constitutes a "grave injury to the mental health of the woman"

p. 3 · ¶ 13

It relied on the precedent of X v. Union of India (2023), which establishes that the 24-week temporal limit can be lifted if the life of the woman is at risk or under specific Medical Board recommendations

pp. 3-4

Furthermore, the court invoked XYZ v. State of Gujarat (2023) and Suchita Srivastava v. State (2009) to affirm that reproductive choice is a fundamental facet of personal liberty and bodily integrity under Article 21 of the Constitution

pp. 5-6

Provisions in the judgment · 7 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 582

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 137 Section 87 Section 64 Section 65

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Section 5 Section 6

04Reasoning

The court reasoned that forcing a minor victim to carry a pregnancy resulting from rape to term would cause unexplainable misery and violate her right to live with dignity

p. 6 · ¶ 9

While the pregnancy had reached 27 weeks and 5 days—exceeding the standard 24-week limit—the court balanced the statutory provisions of the MTP Act with the "best interest" theory for the victim

p. 7 · ¶ 10

It noted the medical board's opinion that the procedure could be performed [p. 2] and emphasized that the victim's mental health would be severely impacted by being constantly reminded of the sexual assault

p. 6

The court determined that the constitutional right to bodily integrity outweighs temporal statutory limits when the pregnancy is a result of a heinous crime against a minor

pp. 6-7