The 'Best Interests' test and the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, particularly Section 3, were central to the judgment, highlighting the importance of considering the victim's well-being and safety in decisions regarding termination of pregnancy.

1. Petitioner herein is a minor girl who through her legal guardian and father who is a labourer has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking termination of pregnancy. She is a victim of rape and aged about 14 years. The FIR came to be filed with Mahila Police Station, Rajkot being I-CR No. 51 of 2016 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Following are the prayers sought for by the present petitioner in terms of Paragraph 7 of the petition, which are reproduced hereunder:-

"(a) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit this Special Criminal Application.

(b) Your Lordships may be pleased to allow this Special Criminal Application by issuing appropriate Writ or order or direction to the respondent authority to terminate the pregnancy of victim Madhu who is minor daughter of petitioner, at the earliest, as the continuance of pregnancy would cause grave injury to the victim minor girl Madhu in the large interest of justice.

(c) Pending admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 to 3 to conduct medical termination of pregnancy of the minor victim Madhu who is the daughter of the petitioner with two qualified surgeons including Gynecologist, Obstetrician and in presence of qualified physician with duo care and precaution, so as to avoid any likelihood of untoward harm to the physical or mental health of the minor victim Madhu, after carrying out necessary medical check-up in the interest of justice.

(d) Your Lordship may be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit, just and proper in the interest of justice."

3. An application was given to the learned Sessions Judge in relation to the said I-CR No. 51 of 2016 seeking termination of pregnancy on 24.5.2016. It was urged that she is having pregnancy of 18 months and as per the Medical Rules, upto 20 weeks, she can be permitted to terminate the pregnancy.

4. Sessions Court rejected such request relying on the provisions of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 ("MTP Act" for short). It also appears that the Court had called the Assistant Professor (Ob & Gy) Government Medical College, Rajkot personally and he was also asked to give exact opinion in respect of the length of pregnancy. In continuation of his earlier opinion, he has examined the victim carefully and opined that he was unsure whether pregnancy exceeds 20 weeks.

5. Both the sides have been heard at length.

6. In the present petition, learned advocate Mr. Jignesh Hajare appearing of the petitioner has relied upon the plethora of judgments, wherein the Court has permitted to terminate the pregnancy beyond stipulated period of 20 weeks on the grounds mentioned in the Statutes itself. The victim - girl is very young to continue with her pregnancy and she has extremely low blood pressure and haemoglobin level is 6.5 as per the latest medical report. Therefore, he has urged that termination of pregnancy be permitted with a further request that Doctors shall take necessary tissues from the fetus by following scientific practice prescribed by the Standard Medical Practice for DNA identification.

7. Learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval has also relied upon some of the judgments delivered by this Court and submitted that the Court may direct for termination of pregnancy, if deems fit, considering the mental health and overall picture.

8. A short question that arises in this petition is as to whether termination of pregnancy be permitted as requested for as the girl is only 14 years of age, having hemoglobin level of 6.5% only and when she is carrying pregnancy of 22 weeks presently.

9. This Court, in case of Chandrakant Jayantilal Suthar v. State of Gujarat, reported in Special Criminal Application No. 4255 of 2015 dealt with the law on the subject extensively and denied the permission this wise:-

42. There is also the issue of the child that is yet to be born. Whatever be the circu