2026 Supreme(MP) 363
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.
Urvashi Arya - Appellant
Versus
The State Of M.P. And Others - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 22392 of 2026
Decided On : 29-06-2026
Important Points
Subject
Constitutional Law - Reproductive Rights
Act Referred
MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY ACT : S.3(2)
MEDICAL TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY RULES : R.3(b)
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, married to the respondent, sought to terminate her 13-week pregnancy, citing emotional trauma, marital separation, and her decision to seek a divorce.
Findings of Court:
The court held that the right to reproductive autonomy is protected under Article 21, and the petitioner has the right to decide on the termination of pregnancy without the need for her husband's consent.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to terminate her pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 given her marital situation and whether the husband's consent is mandatory.
Ratio Decidendi: A woman is the ultimate decision-maker regarding her own body and reproductive autonomy, and her decision to terminate an unwanted pregnancy does not require the consent of her husband, particularly considering her change in marital status under Rule 3B.
Result: Petition allowed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shri Govind Pal Singh Songara - Advocate
For the Respondent: Ms. Pranjali Yajurvedi - GA
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks termination of pregnancy due to marital breakdown. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. reproductive autonomy rests with the woman alone regardless of marital status. (Para 7 , 8 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. petition for medical termination of pregnancy is allowed. (Para 16) |
ORDER :
SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on admission.
2. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking following reliefs :
(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction permitting the Petitioner to undergo medical termination of her pregnancy, presently of approximately 13 weeks, through a Registered Medical Practitioner at any Government Hospital or recognized Private Hospital in accordance with Section 3(2) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 read with Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003;
(ii) Direct the Respondents/concerned medical authorities to immediately constitute, if deemed necessary, an appropriate Medical Board for examination of the Petitioner and for assessing.
iii) Whether it is safe for the petitioner to undergo the procedure for medical termination of pregnancy.
iv) To pass such other or further order(s), direction(s) or relief(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, proper and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice.
3. The peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case is that the mother, who is carrying fetus of 13 weeks and 1 day at the time of filing present petition is before this Court by praying that she be permitted to terminate her pregnancy as she was married with respondent no. 3/Ajay Verma and thereafter, they have decided to file proceeding for divorce. It is also stated at bar that in view of some criminal proceeding, compromise is taken place between the respondent no. 3 / husband and wife and at the relevant point of time, the husband as well as wife, both are agreed for divorce, that too in presence of police at the police station. It is also stated at bar that thereafter, husband has not shown any willingness for divorce and the petitioner being wife, who is carrying fetus of more than 13 weeks is praying to grant permission to terminate the pregnancy on the ground that continuation of present pregnancy will subject the petitioner to grey out mental trauma, insecurity and also potential threats to her mental as well as physical well being and also it will cause emotional suffering to her and therefore, the present petition is filed by making prayer as prayed in the petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at present, pregnancy of the petitioner is within the permissible statutory limit prescribed under section 3(2) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and the petitioner is legally entitled to seek termination of pregnancy through registered medical practitioner in accordance with law. It is further submitted that Rule 3 B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 specifically recognizes women undergoing change in marital status including separation on the basis involving domestic violence as eligible category for termination of pregnancy upto the prescribed statutory provision.
5. He has also submitted that in view of the fact that the petitioner is presently residing separately at the parental home and has decided not to continue the matrimonial relationship with her husband with intent to seek divorce proceeding in accordance with law, therefore, compelling the petitioner to continue with the pregnancy would seriously prejudice her future for supply of mental stability and social-economic status, therefore, he prays for grant of relief, though it is not mandatory to seek from the High Court in view of the specific provision under section 3 of the Act. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, as the husband is also party, who may raise any object