Facts
The petitioners, a 17-year-old minor rape survivor of unsound mind ('X') and her maternal grandfather, sought a direction for the medical termination of her five-month pregnancy.
Source reference: para. 2An FIR was registered on 11.06.2023.
Source reference: para. 3Despite a medical report confirming pregnancy at 22 weeks and 6 days, and the victim’s statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she did not wish to keep the child, the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) and the Child Welfare Committee (CWC) failed to facilitate termination.
Source reference: para. 5, 14The CWC erroneously directed that the pregnancy should not be aborted.
Source reference: para. 14A delay of 54 days occurred before the High Court intervened, by which time a surgical delivery was necessitated.
Source reference: para. 5, 106The court subsequently expanded the scope to investigate systemic failures in the implementation of the MTP Act and the POCSO Act across Uttar Pradesh.
Source reference: para. 21-27Issues
1. Whether there was a systemic failure by State authorities in implementing the statutory mandate for medical termination of pregnancy for minor rape survivors.
Source reference: para. 21, 372. Whether the lack of functional Medical Boards and adequate Support Persons constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights of victims under Article 21.
Source reference: para. 37, 443. What institutional mechanisms must be established to ensure accountability and coordination between the Police, Health Department, and Child Welfare Committees.
Source reference: para. 132-133Law Applied
The court applied Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 (as amended in 2021), which mandates the constitution of Medical Boards and allows termination up to 24 weeks, and beyond for fetal abnormalities or rape survivors.
Source reference: para. 28-33It relied on Section 39 of the POCSO Act, 2012, and Rule 4 of the POCSO Rules, 2020, regarding the mandatory appointment of Support Persons.
Source reference: para. 46, 51The court also invoked the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, specifically Section 27 regarding the duties of the CWC and Section 54 regarding mandatory inspections.
Source reference: para. 38, 60Constitutional principles of reproductive autonomy and bodily integrity from X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, NCT of Delhi (2022) were central to the mandate.
Source reference: para. 6, 37Reasoning
The Court found a "troubling tendency of bureaucratic systems to render the law ineffective".
Source reference: Intro; p. 1Analysis of State data revealed that for 52 years, many districts lacked functional Medical Boards, and bulk reconstitutions occurred only after judicial prodding.
Source reference: para. 111, 115The court noted a "catastrophic mismatch" in the Department of Women and Child Development, where districts like Gorakhpur had only 2 Support Persons for 1,142 cases.
Source reference: para. 47-48The CWC’s refusal to allow termination was deemed "insensitive" and "negligent," ignoring the victim's mental state and legal autonomy.
Source reference: para. 85, 117The Court linked the 54-day delay directly to the CMO’s failure to constitute a Board under Section 3(2-D) of the MTP Act.
Source reference: para. 105, 114The lack of oversight was evidenced by the Principal Secretary's "NIL" return on mandatory inspections of Child Care Institutions over five years.
Source reference: para. 59-60Holding
The Court held that the State’s administrative machinery systematically denied statutory rights to child rape victims.
(i) victims must be produced before a CMO/Medical Board without losing a single day; (ii) police must record all steps in the General Diary for oversight; (iii) every district must maintain a functional Medical Board reconstituted annually; and (iv) the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) is empowered to recommend salary attachment and disciplinary action against CMOs or CWC members for dereliction of duty.
Source reference: para. 133, 135, 139, 146.1-146.2The Court further directed the State to conduct a socio-psychological study and recommended the enactment of new legislation to protect the rights of children born out of rape.
Source reference: para. 143, 152Original Court PDF
Baru Singh And AnothervsState Of U.P. And 4 Others
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in