SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Raj) 2141

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Nupur Bhati, J.
X & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary, Medical and Health and ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 288 of 2025
Decided On : 09-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rishabh Tayal, Mr. Vaibhav Bang, Mr. Vivek Sharma, Mr. Jitendra Choudhary, Mr. Muskan Jangid
For the Respondent: Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, AAG, assisted by M.S. Anita Rajpurohit

Termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks is permitted only for substantial foetal abnormalities or immediate health risks; in absence, proper medical care must be ensured.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 - Sections 3 and 5 - Petition for medical termination of pregnancy of minor rape victim - Not authorized beyond 24 weeks unless substantial foetal abnormalities are diagnosed or other critical health risks exist - Medical Board opined that termination is high-risk; no foetal abnormality diagnosed. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 8)

(B) Responsibilities of medical facilities - Court directed that petitioner receives all necessary medical care; privacy must be maintained; facilitation of custody transfer post-delivery; compensation to be awarded under the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners requested for medical termination of pregnancy for a minor victim of rape. The minor's medical board's report indicated viability of the fetus at 31 weeks, indicating high risk for termination.

Findings of Court:
The court emphasized that without substantial risks or abnormalities, termination beyond specified gestation limits is not permissible and directed necessary medical care for the petitioner.

Issues: Whether medical termination can be allowed at this gestation age without substantial foetal abnormalities or critical health risks.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the existing law only allows termination under certain conditions, none of which applied in this case.

Result: Writ petition disposed of; directions for medical care and compensation provided.

Table of Content
1. writ petition for medical termination of pregnancy (Para 1 , 2)
2. directions for medical examination and board constitution (Para 3 , 4)
3. medical board's opinion on termination feasibility (Para 5)
4. legal framework for pregnancy termination under mtp act (Para 6)
5. rejection of termination due to potential risks (Para 7)
6. final order and directions for care and compensation (Para 8 , 9)

ORDER :

Nupur Bhati, J.

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners seeking medical termination of pregnancy of petitioner no.3(a minor) seeking following relief(s):

“It is, therefore, prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction:

1. The respondents may be directed to constitute a Medical Board constituting a Gynecologist; a Pediatrician; a Radiologist or Sonologist; a Psychiatrist; and any other expert that may be deemed necessary for conducting medical examination of the petitioner No.3.

2. The respondents may be further directed that in case the Medical Board is of the opinion that termination of pregnancy of the minor victim can be undertaken without risk to her life, the respondents shall ensure that termination of pregnancy of the minor victim is undertaken by competent doctors in accordance with the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and rules framed thereunder.

3. In alternate, if the Medical Board is of the opinion that termination of pregnancy of the minor victim cannot be undertaken without risk to her life, the respondents may be directed to provide the petitioner all necessary care, nutritious food and medical attendance to the petitioner before and after delivery.

4. The respondents may be directed to maintain the privacy of the petitioner at all stages and her identity should not be disclosed in the course of hospitalization, treatment and admission.

5. The respondents may be directed to pay suitable amount of compensation to the petitioner, who is a victim in terms of the provisions contained under the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011.

6. That the respondents may be directed that if the petitioner desire to give away the child for adoption to any willing parents, the respondents shall take care of all the needs and facilities of the child along with all necessary documentation and all formalities.

7. Any other appropriate relief which this Hon’ble Court High Court deems may be granted in favour of the petitioners.”

2. It is averred by the counsel for petitioners that Petitioner no.3 is a rape victim and she does not wish to continue the pregnancy. He also submits that the petitioner no.2(Mother of the petitioner no.3) also does not want her daughter to continue the pregnancy.

3. On the request of the petitioners, this court vide order dated07.01.2025 gave following directions:

“...3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, the respondent No.5-Superintendent, Umaid Hospital, Siawanchi Gate, Jodhpur (Raj.), is directed to instruct an expert Sonologist at the said hospital to conduct sonography of ‘X’ on or before 5 PM today itself. ‘X’ along with her mother/brother, is directed to remain present before the concerned doctor for undergoing the sonography. The respondent No.5- Superintendent, Umaid Hospital, Siawanchi Gate, Jodhpur (Raj.), is directed to constitute a Medical Board of three senior doctors, who after examining ‘X’ physically and while also taking into consideration the sonography report, shall opine as to whether she is medically fit to endure the delivery. As the present writ petition has been filed praying for termination of pregnancy, the Medical Board is also directed to opine whether the petitioner is medically fit for termination of pregnancy.

4. It is further directed that the sonography report as well as the opinion of the Medical Board be placed before this Court tomorrow i.e. on 08.01.2025. Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, learned AAG, is directed to ensure compliance of this order...”

4. Upo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top