The judgment underlines the importance of reproductive autonomy and medical advice in cases of severe foetal abnormalities, allowing termination beyond statutory limits if justified.

JUDGMENT

The petitioners, who are husband and wife, have been seeking medical termination of 25 weeks' old pregnancy of the first petitioner, after having found the foetus is having a complex congenital heart disease. The petitioners are also parents of a child. Exts.P2 to P4 would indicate that there is substantial risk that, if the child is born, it would suffer from serious physical abnormalities The petitioners, therefore, seek for a direction to the respondents to permit the first petitioner to undergo medical termination of pregnancy.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Central Government Counsel and the learned Government Pleader. 3. When the writ petition came up for consideration on 12.12.2025, this Court directed the additional sixth respondent to constitute a Medical Board for the purpose of assessing the following:-

a) Whether continuance of the petitioner's pregnancy will involve risk to her life or grave injury to her physical or mental health?

b) Whether there is a substantial risk that if the child is born, it will suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped and if so, the nature of abnormalities; and, c) Whether, having regard to the advanced stage of pregnancy, there is any danger (other than usual danger which arises even in spontaneous delivery at the end of full term) if the pregnant mother is permitted to terminate her pregnancy?

4. On 16.12.2025, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that the Medical Board could not be constituted on 15.12.2025 and further submitted that it would be constituted on 17.12.2025. Accordingly, the first petitioner was directed to appear before the Superintendent, Medical College Hospital, Kottayam, on 17.12.2025. Today, the learned Government Pleader made available before this Court a report dated 17.12.2025 of the Medical Board, which reads as follows:

“5. Available report and investigations:

5. Additional Investigations (if any)

SL.No. Investigations done Key findings

1 Nil Nil

6. Opinion by Medical Board for termination of pregnancy:

a) Allowed: Allowed b) Denied:

Justification for the decision: The child if delivered has got poor prognosis in survival and may develop severe morbidity. Hence MTP may be recommended.

7. Physical fitness of the woman for the termination of pregnancy:

a) Yes: Yes b) No:

Members of the Medical Board who reviewed the case.

Date and Time: 17.12.2025, 12.30 pm”

5. The Medical Report reveals that the gestational age is 25 weeks and three days. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is prepared to proceed with the termination of pregnancy at a higher medical centre with facilities for proper medical care as provided in the report. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, while referring the petitioner for termination, may also leave her choice in respect of the hospital. The learned counsel placed reliance on the Government of India guidelines that are referred to by the Honourable Supreme Court inA (Mother of X) v.State of Maharashtra [ (2024) 6 SCC 327 ] to support his submission.

6. The termination of pregnancy is governed by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (‘Act’, in short), and the rules framed thereunder. The Act is a progressive legislation that regulates how pregnancies can be terminated.

7. Section 3 of the Act spells out the conditions to be satisfied to terminate a pregnancy, which reads as follows:

"S.3 - When pregnancies may be terminated by registered medical practitioners.—

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), a registered medica