The Karnataka High Court has disposed of a petition filed by a 16-year-old sexual assault survivor seeking medical termination of her pregnancy, after the State of Karnataka notified a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure for Early Identification and Timely Response to Underage Pregnancies across the state.

Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav, presiding over the single-judge bench, recorded on July 31, 2026 that the state had gazetted the SOP, rendering further adjudication unnecessary. The court had initially permitted the termination in July 2025, subject to medical opinion, but the case expanded into a broader exercise to address systemic gaps in how authorities handle pregnancies arising from sexual assault involving minors.

Court's Collaborative Approach Led to State-Driven SOP

The petitioner, represented by her mother as guardian, approached the court after conceiving as a result of sexual assault. The minor, a class nine student at a BBMP-managed school in Nagarabhavi, had suppressed the assault until pregnancy tests confirmed conception. Her mother, a single parent working as a housemaid from a financially weak background, sought the court's intervention to terminate the pregnancy, which had reached 32 weeks by the time the petition was filed.

The court permitted the termination on July 4, 2025, subject to medical opinion, and directed that if the foetus survived the procedure, steps must be taken for its healthy growth. A report filed on July 3, 2025 confirmed that the foetus had indeed survived the termination. The child-mother subsequently surrendered the baby before the Child Welfare Committee.

Noting that the minor had approached the court after thirty weeks of gestation — far beyond the 24-week limit under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021 — the court expressed concern about the systemic failures that led to such delayed access. On July 16, 2025, the court passed directions identifying three areas requiring intervention: early detection of pregnancy in sexual offence cases, protection of the foetus's right to life when it survives termination, and adoption procedures for the child.

The court observed that the delay stemmed either from the victim being silenced by fear of societal shaming and stigma, or from her being unaware of her legal right to termination, putting herself in danger. "In light of the plight of the victim of sexual assault, the Court felt that legal framework was silent and could not ameliorate the condition of a victim of sexual assault. This necessitated framing of an SOP addressing all aspects," the judgment recorded.

Rather than imposing judicial directions unilaterally, the court adopted a collaborative approach, appointing advocate Swagatha Raha as amicus curiae and inviting suggestions from the petitioner, the state, and other stakeholders. The court noted that previous experiences showed judicial directions often face implementation resistance from executive agencies. "The way out would be for the Court to involve the Executive in designing an Executive direction keeping in mind the objective with which the Court had intended to pass such directions," the judgment stated.

Through a series of orders dated January 5, 2026, April 25, 2026, and April 30, 2026, the court facilitated joint meetings involving the Chief Secretary and secretaries from the Departments of Women and Child Development, Health and Family Welfare, and Education. The state accepted suggestions from the amicus and the petitioner, finalized a draft SOP, and eventually notified it in the gazette on July 31, 2026.

SOP Mandates Timely Access Without Court Order Under 24 Weeks

The notified SOP, applicable across the entire state of Karnataka, establishes protocols for police, registered medical practitioners, medical boards, Child Welfare Committees, District Child Protection Units, support persons, and child care institutions. A critical clarification in the SOP states that for pregnancies under 24 weeks, no court order or Child Welfare Committee order is required for termination. Permission from the police is also not required.

The SOP incorporates the gestational age framework under the MTP Act: up to 20 weeks requires one registered medical practitioner's opinion; between 20 and 24 weeks requires two practitioners' opinions; and beyond 24 weeks requires a Medical Board opinion. It further clarifies that termination at any gestational age is permitted if immediately necessary to save the pregnant woman's life.

For police authorities, the SOP mandates facilitation of emergency medical care and medical examination within 24 hours, registration of zero FIR where jurisdiction differs, and arrangement of DNA kits in coordination with forensic laboratories. Police must maintain chain of custody for products of conception and hand them over to the Forensic Science Laboratory within seven days — or within 24 hours if the laboratory is in the same district.

The SOP incorporates the Supreme Court's ruling in X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of NCT, holding that a registered medical practitioner, upon request of the minor and guardian, need not disclose the minor's identity in information provided under Section 19(1) of the POCSO Act. The SOP directs that police shall not compel or coerce practitioners to share identifying information in such cases.

Registered medical practitioners are directed to provide immediate medical assistance without demanding an FIR or legal requisition as a precondition. Medico-legal examination must be completed within 24 hours using the Sexual Assault Forensic Evidence kit. Practitioners must obtain informed consent in the vernacular language and counsel the child and guardian about lawful options under the MTP Act and the Juvenile Justice Act.

The SOP expressly states that Child Welfare Committees are not authorized to pass orders permitting termination of pregnancy. Instead, they must record the child's intent in writing, facilitate termination within one week for pregnancies under 20 weeks and within two days for pregnancies above 20 weeks following medical board or court opinion, and recognize a guardian where parents are unavailable, unfit, or their views conflict with the child's.

Medical boards are directed not to form legal opinions on whether conditions under the MTP Act are satisfied, but to provide medical opinions on the risk to the physical and mental health of the pregnant person if the pregnancy continues. The opinion must consider distress and trauma caused by pregnancies arising from sexual assault and incest, and note health risks including future childbearing capacity.

The SOP also establishes monitoring mechanisms, including a state-level committee chaired by the Principal Secretary of the Department of Women and Child Development, and district-level oversight through the District Child Protection Committee. A dashboard will be created by multiple departments to monitor timelines from detection of pregnancy to provision of services.

With the SOP now gazetted, the court concluded that no further orders were called for and disposed of the petition, recording appreciation for the assistance of Additional Advocate General Smt. Prathima Honnapura, learned counsel for the petitioner Ms. Rithika Ravikumar, and amicus curiae Ms. Swagatha Raha.