Termination of pregnancy for minors must adhere to statutory requirements while considering mental health aspects.

1. In this petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents for terminating the pregnancy of his minor daughter who is allegedly a rape victim. In addition, petitioner has prayed for grant of suitable compensation.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he lodged a report before Police Station Mundi, District Khandwa on 15.10.2017 stating that his minor daughter has been kidnapped. The respondent No.6, in turn, investigated the matter and arrested the accused. The offences under S.363, S.366, S.376 of IPC read with S.4 & S.6 of POCOS Act were alleged against the accused. The police authority secured custody of the minor daughter (herein after called as "victim") of petitioner from the accused and she was handed - over to the petitioner by Supurdginama dated 31.10.2017 (Annexure - P / 2). The police authority by communication dated 31.10.2017 informed the petitioner that the victim is having pregnancy of about 16 weeks.

3. The petitioner contended that the victim is a minor. The petitioner being guardian has given his consent for terminating the pregnancy. If such pregnancy is forced upon the victim, it will violate her right of "personal liberty" as enshrined under Art.21 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this contention relied on S.3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (the Act of 1971) and the judgment of Supreme Court reported in 2015 (8) SCC 721 , (Chandrakant Jayantilal Suthar & another vs. State of Gujarat).

4. Per - contra, Mr. Yadav, learned Deputy A.G. produced the documents dated 04.12.2017, 05.12.2017 and the consent letter of petitioner whereby he has given consent for examining the victim relating to pregnancy. By letter dated 04.12.2017 the SHO, P.S. Mundi, District Khandwa requested the Gynaecologist, District Hospital Khandwa to examine and give report on following points: (i) the duration of pregnancy of the victim; (ii) whether the victim's pregnancy can be terminated; and (iii) any other opinion which is justifiable. In the bottom of this letter, the Gynaecologist, Dr. Laxmi (the complete name of doctor is not legible in the document) has given her opinion: viz (i) that the victim is having pregnancy of a period of five months; (ii) upto five months (20 weeks), the pregnancy can be terminated; & (iii) NIL.

5. Mr. Pushpendra Yadav, learned Deputy AG also placed reliance on S.3 of the Act of 1971. He assisted the Court by placing reliance on 2 013 (1) MPHT 451, (Hallo Bi @ Halima vs. State of MP & others).

6. No other point has been pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.

7. I have heard the parties at length and perused the record.

8. Before dealing with the rival contentions of the parties, it is apposite to refer the relevant provision of the Act. S.3 reads as under:

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

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), a registered medical practitioner shall not be guilty of any offence under that Code or under any other law for the time being in force, if any pregnancy is terminated by him in accordance with the provisions of this Act.

(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), a pregnancy may be terminated by a registered medicalpractitioner, -

(a) where the length of the pregnancy does not exceed twelve weeks, if such medical practitioner is, or "

(b) where the length of the pregnancy e