Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prosecutrix X vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 October, 2025
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799
1 WP-40714-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 14th OF OCTOBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 40714 of 2025
PROSECUTRIX X
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri A.S. Baghel - Government Advocate for the State.
ORDER
In pursuance to the letter addressed to the Registrar General dated 11.10.2025 as per directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of In reference (suo moto) vs State of M.P. : Writ Petition No. 5184 of 2025 decided on 20.02.2025, cognizance was taken and the letter was treated as suo moto petition. Accordingly, this writ petition came up for consideration before this Court.
2. The facts of the case, in substance, are that the prosecutrix is minor aged around 15 years. It is alleged that she was sexually assaulted and raped by accused against which an FIR has been registered in Crime No.584 of 2025 for the offence under Sections 137(2), 64, 64(2)(M), 65(1) of the BNS and Sections 5(J)/6, 5(J)(II)/6 of POCSO Act. During medical examination, the victim was found to be pregnant of 27 weeks 2 days.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner being a rape victim, is having every right to get the termination of her pregnancy. The opinion of the Medical Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 2 WP-40714-2025 Board is produced before this Court, the relevant extracts read as follows :
"5. Opinion by Medical Board for termination of pregnancy:
a) Allowed:
b) Denied : Denied The gestational age of the fetus is more than 24 weeks hence medical termination can not be performed as per MTP amendment act 2021. In case of permission or order of MTP by honorable court such termination can be performed with all the explained risk of anticipated and unanticipated complications related to termination of such high risk teenage pregnancy. Termination of pregnancy at this gestational age and continuation of pregnancy, both, carries risk of complications."
4. From perusal of the report so submitted, it appears that the examination has been conducted by the Medical Board including Superintendent Representative, Obstetrics and Gynecologists, Medicine, Pediatric Medicine, Pathology, Surgery and Radiodiagnosis. The report as terms of Form-D is placed on record. The victim, who is aged around 15 years 3 months 9 days is found to be carrying pregnancy of 27 weeks 2 days as on 10/10/2025. However, the Medical Board has observed that as there is a bar under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Act, 2021 for terminating pregnancies exceeding 24 weeks, it is observed that termination can be performed with all the explained risk of anticipated and unanticipated complications related to termination of such high risk teenage pregnancy and termination of pregnancy at this gestational age and continuation of pregnancy, both carries risk of complications. The report clearly indicates that the pregnancy can be terminated subject to certain risks. The risk factors will always be explained to the victim.
5. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that Section 3 of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 3 WP-40714-2025 Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 does not permit the pregnancy exceeding 24 weeks. It is further submitted that there are judgments on this issue which was referred to the Division Bench of this Court in the case of In Reference (Suo Motu) v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others: W.P. No.5184/2025 which was decided on 20.02.2025 wherein after due consideration, the SOP has been formed which is required to be followed upto 24 weeks and exceeding 24 weeks.
6. In the present case, the age of the fetus is exceeding 24 weeks. Therefore, the SOP is required to be followed in the present case which is as under:
"SOPs to be followed in case where the age of foetus/pregnancy of survivor of sexual assault or rape or incest is exceeding 24 Weeks:-
Whenever a case of rape is registered at any police station, the following procedure shall be adopted:-
(i) The SHO of the said police station, on the basis of the MLC of the victim indicating that she is pregnant and the pregnancy is more than 24 weeks, shall forthwith forward the victim to the concerned District Court, preferably Special Judge/POCSO; (ii) The learned Judge of the District Court preferably Special Judge/POCSO), regardless of any application for termination of pregnancy, though not maintainable, filed before it or not, shall refer the victim to the concerned medical officer/Board to expeditiously submit its report, if the pregnancy of the victim can be terminated;
(iii) The District Court, preferably Special Judge/POCSO, after obtaining the said medical report, under intimation to the victim and her parents, directly refer such case and report to the nearest Registry of the High Court; (iv) The Registry of High Court, in turn, shall register Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 4 WP-40714-2025 such reference as a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, Suo Motu, and list the matter immediately before the concerned Bench having the roster, so that appropriate orders regarding termination of pregnancy can be passed by the High Court without any undue delay;
(v) If directed by the High Court that termination of pregnancy is required then, the procedure of termination of pregnancy will be carried out in the presence of the expert team of doctors. The expert doctors will explain to the family members as well as the petitioner the risk of getting the termination of her pregnancy and also other factors;
(vi) Every care and caution will be taken by the doctors while terminating the pregnancy. All medical attention and other medical facilities including that of a presence of a Pediatrician as well as a Radiologist and other required doctors will be made available to the victim;
(vii) The post operative care, upto the extent required, will be extended to the victim;
(viii) The doctors will ensure that a sample from the fetus is protected for DNA examination and will be handed over to the prosecution for using in the criminal case."
7. Section 3 of the MTP Act, 1971 deals with termination of pregnancy and the relevant is 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 medical practitioner,--Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 5 WP-40714-2025
(a) where the length of the pregnancy does not exceed twenty weeks, if such medical practitioner is, or
(b) where the length of the pregnancy exceeds twenty weeks but does not exceed twenty-four weeks in case of such category of woman as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act, if not less than two registered medical practitioners are, of the opinion, formed in good faith, that--
(i) the continuance of the pregnancy would involve a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health; or (ii) there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from any serious physical or mental abnormality.
Explanation 1.--For the purposes of clause (a), where any pregnancy occurs as a result of failure of any device or method used by any woman or her partner for the purpose of limiting the number of children or preventing pregnancy, the anguish caused by such pregnancy may be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. Explanation 2.--For the purposes of clauses (a) and
(b), where any pregnancy is alleged by the pregnant woman to have been caused by rape, the anguish caused by the pregnancy shall be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman.
(2A) The norms for the registered medical practitioner whose opinion is required for termination of pregnancy at different gestational age shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act.
(2B) The provisions of sub-section (2) relating to the length of the pregnancy shall not apply to the termination of pregnancy by the medical practitioner where such termination is necessitated by the diagnosis of any of the substantial foetal abnormalities diagnosed by a Medical Board.
(2C) Every State Government or Union territory, as the case Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 6 WP-40714-2025 may be, shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a Board to be called a Medical Board for the purposes of this Act to exercise such powers and functions as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act.
(2D) The Medical Board shall consist of the following, namely:--
(a) a Gynaecologist;
(b) a Paediatrician;
(c) a Radiologist or Sonologist; and
(d) such other number of members as may be notified in the Official Gazette by the State Government or Union territory, as the case may be.
(3) In determining whether the continuance of a pregnancy would involve such risk of injury to the health as is mentioned in sub-section (2), account may be taken of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment. (4) (a) No pregnancy of a woman, who has not attained the age of eighteen years, or, who having attained the age of eighteen years, is a mentally ill person, shall be terminated except with the consent in writing of her guardian.
(b) Save as otherwise provided in clause (a), no pregnancy shall be terminated except with the consent of the pregnant woman."
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a series of judgments had an occasion to consider the aspect of termination of pregnancies exceeding 24 weeks and in the case of X vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department reported in AIR 2022 SC 4917, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the aforesaid aspect of the matter including the choice of the woman to get the pregnancy terminated and other socio-economic factors including the physical health condition of the woman has permitted for Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 7 WP-40714-2025 terminating the pregnancy. The aforesaid judgment was again followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of XYZ vs State of Gujarat and others, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1573, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of several aspects of the matter has permitted for termination of pregnancy. It has been held as under :
17. More recently, in the case of X v. The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, AIR 2022 SC 4917; this Court, in another three-
judge Bench lead by Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. (as the learned Chief Justice then was) observed that a woman can become pregnant by choice irrespective of her marital status. In case the pregnancy is warranted, it is equally shared by both the partners. However, in case of an unwanted or incidental pregnancy, the burden invariably falls on the pregnant woman affecting her mental and physical health. Article 21 of the Constitution recognizes and protects the right of a woman to undergo termination of pregnancy if her mental or physical health is at stake. Importantly, it is the woman alone who has the right over her body and is the ultimate decision-maker on the question of whether she wants to undergo an abortion.
18. In the context of abortion, the right of dignity entails recognising the competence and authority of every woman to take reproductive decisions, including the decision to terminate the pregnancy. Although human dignity inheres in every individual, it is susceptible to violation by external conditions and treatment imposed by the State. The right of every woman to make reproductive choices without undue interference from the state is central to the idea of human dignity. Deprivation of access to reproductive healthcare or emotional and physical well-being also injures the dignity of women.
19. The whole object of preferring a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to engage with the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction of the High Court in exercise of its constitutional power. Such a power is vested with the constitutional courts and discretion has to be exercised judiciously and having regard to the facts of the case and by taking into consideration the relevant facts while leaving out irrelevant considerations and not vice versa.
20. In view of the above discussion and on perusal of the latest medical report we permit the appellant to terminate her Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 8 WP-40714-2025 pregnancy. We direct the appellant to remain present before the KMCRI Hospital, Bharuch, Gujarat during the course of the day, today (21.08.2023) or 09 : 00 A.M. tomorrow (22.08.2023) as she deems fit so that the termination of pregnancy could be carried out preferably during the course of the day today (21.08.2023) or tomorrow i.e. 22.08.2023.
21. Subsequently to the medical procedure to be carried out either today or tomorrow, in the event, the foetus is found to be alive, the hospital shall give all necessary medical assistance including incubation either in that hospital or any other hospital where incubation facility is available in order to ensure that the foetus survives. Further, in case the foetus survives, then State shall take steps for ensuring that the child could be adopted in accordance with law.
22. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant sought a direction to the concerned doctors to preserve evidence for subsequent DNA Test Report by drawing tissues from the foetus in order to use it as a piece of evidence in the ensuing trial to be prosecuted by the appellant herein. We direct the concerned medical experts to have regard to the feasibility of such a procedure being done, in the event of the foetus being alive or in the event the foetus not being alive or is still born and accordingly take steps as sought for by the appellant herein.
23. It is needless to observe that in the event tissues are drawn for the purpose of DNA test the same shall be handed over to the investigating agency by the concerned hospital.
24. A copy of this order passed today be handed over to learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the State of Gujarat.
25. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
26. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
9. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A (Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra and another : 2024 (6) SCC 327 had an occasion to deal with a similar issue and has held that as under:-
"28. The powers vested under the Constitution in the High Court and this Court allow them to enforce fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. When a person approaches the court for permission to terminate a pregnancy, the courts apply their mind to the case and make a decision to Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 9 WP-40714-2025 protect the physical and mental health of the pregnant person. In doing so the court relies on the opinion of the Medical Board constituted under the MTP Act for their medical expertise. The court would thereafter apply their judicial mind to the opinion of the Medical Board. Therefore, the Medical Board cannot merely state that the grounds under Section 3(2- B) of the MTP Act are not met. The exercise of the jurisdiction of the courts would be affected if they did not have the advantage of the medical opinion of the board as to the risk involved to the physical and mental health of the pregnant person. Therefore, a Medical Board must examine the pregnant person and opine on the aspect of the risk to their physical and mental health.
29. The MTP Act has removed the restriction on the length of the pregnancy for termination in only two instances. Section 5 of the MTP Act prescribes that a pregnancy may be terminated, regardless of the gestational age, if the medical practitioner is of the opinion formed in good faith that the termination is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant person. Section 3(2-B) of the Act stipulates that no limit shall apply on the length of the pregnancy for terminating a foetus with substantial abnormalities. The legislation has made a value judgment in Section 3(2-B) of the Act, that a substantially abnormal foetus would be more injurious to the mental and physical health of a woman than any other circumstance. In this case, the circumstance against which the provision is comparable is rape of a minor. To deny the same enabling provision of the law would appear prima facie unreasonable and arbitrary. The value judgment of the legislation does not appear to be based on scientific parameters but rather on a notion that a substantially abnormal foetus will inflict the most aggravated form of injury to the pregnant person. This formed the basis for this Court to exercise its Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 10 WP-40714-2025 powers and allow the termination of pregnancy in its order dated 22-4- 2024 [A v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 608] . The provision is arguably suspect on the ground that it unreasonably alters the autonomy of a person by classifying a substantially abnormal foetus differently than instances such as incest or rape. This issue may be examined in an appropriate proceeding should it become necessary.
30. Moreover, we are conscious of the fact that the decision to terminate pregnancy is one which a person takes seriously. The guidelines to terminate pregnancy as well as the scheme of the MTP Act show the seriousness attached to the well-being of the pregnant person throughout the process envisaged under the MTP Act. Change in the opinion of the Medical Board may cause undue trauma and exertion to a pregnant person whose mental health is understandably under distress. While we understand the need for a Medical Board to issue a clarificatory opinion based on the facts and circumstances of each case, the board must explain the reasons for the issuance of the clarification and, in particular, if their opinion has changed from the earlier report. Pregnant persons seeking termination of pregnancy seek predictability for their future. The uncertainty caused by changing opinions of the Medical Board must therefore balance the distress it would cause to the pregnant person by providing cogent and sound reasons.
"35. In Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn. (2009) 9 SCC 1 : (2009) 3 SCC (Civ) 570, a three-Judge Bench of this Court has held that the right to make reproductive choices is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution. Further, the consent of the pregnant person in matters of reproductive choices and abortion is paramount. The purport of this Court's decision in Suchita Srivastava was to protect the right to abortion on a firm footing as an intrinsic element of the fundamental rights to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity as well as to reaffirm Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 11 WP-40714-2025 that matters of sexual and reproductive choices belong to the individual alone. In rejecting the State's jurisdiction as the parens patriae of the pregnant person, this Court held that no entity, even if it is the State, can speak on behalf of a pregnant person and usurp her consent. The choice to continue pregnancy to term, regardless of the court having allowed termination of the pregnancy, belongs to the individual alone.
36. In the present case the view of X and her parents to take the pregnancy to term are in tandem. The right to choose and reproductive freedom is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, where the opinion of a minor pregnant person differs from the guardian, the court must regard the view of the pregnant person as an important factor while deciding the termination of the pregnancy."
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of NCT of Delhi, 2023 (9) SCC 433 had an occasion to consider the constitutional values animating the interpretation of MTP Act and Rules and with the Right to Reproductive Autonomy of a woman. The Supreme Court held that the MTP Act is an aid to interpretation understanding injury to mental health and held as under:-
"64. When interpreting a sub-clause or part of a statutory provision, the entire section should be read together with different sub-clauses being a part of an integral whole. [Balasinor Nagrik Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya, (1987) 1 SCC 606; Madanlal Fakirchand Dudhediya v. Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd., 1962 SCC OnLine SC 65 : 1962 Supp (3) SCR 973 : AIR 1962 SC 1543] In terms of Section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act, not less than two RMPs must, in good faith, be of the opinion that the continuation of the pregnancy of any woman who falls within the ambit of Rule 3- B would involve : (i) a risk to her life; (ii) grave injury to her Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 12 WP-40714-2025 physical health; or (iii) grave injury to her mental health. Alternatively, not less than two RMPs must, in good faith, be of the opinion that there is a substantial risk of the child suffering from a serious physical or mental abnormality, if born. Women who seek to avail of the benefit under Rule 3-B of the MTP Rules continue to be subject to the requirements of Section 3(2) of the MTP Act.
65. One of the grounds on the basis of which termination of pregnancy may be carried out is when the continuance of a pregnancy would involve risk of injury to the mental health of the woman. The expression "grave injury to her physical or mental health" used in Section 3(2) is used in an overarching and all-encompassing sense. The two Explanations appended to Section 3(2) provide the circumstances under which the anguish caused by a pregnancy may be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of a woman.
66. Courts in the country have permitted women to terminate their pregnancies where the length of the pregnancy exceeded twenty weeks (the outer limit for the termination of the pregnancy in the unamended MTP Act) by expansively interpreting Section 5, which permitted RMPs to terminate pregnancies beyond the twenty-week limit when it was necessary to save the life of the woman. In X v. Union of India [X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458] , Mamta Verma v. Union of India [Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289], Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India [Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462], Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India [Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339] , this Court permitted the termination of post twenty-week pregnancies after taking into account the risk of grave injury to the mental health of a pregnant woman by carrying the pregnancy to term.
67. The grounds for approaching courts differ and include Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 13 WP-40714-2025 various reasons such as a change in the circumstances of a woman's environment during an ongoing pregnancy, including risk to life, [A v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 75; X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458; Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462; Tapasya Umesh Pisal v. Union of India, (2018) 12 SCC 57; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289] risk to mental health, [X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458; Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462; Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289; Z v. State of Bihar, (2018) 11 SCC 572 :
(2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 675] discovery of foetal anomalies, [A v.
Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 75; Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339; Tapasya Umesh Pisal v. Union of India, (2018) 12 SCC 57; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289] late discovery of pregnancy in case of minors and women with disabilities, [X v. Union of India, (2020) 19 SCC 806] and pregnancies resulting from sexual assault or rape. [Z v. State of Bihar, (2018) 11 SCC 572 :
(2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 675; X v. Union of India, (2020) 19 SCC 806] These are illustrative situations thrown up by cases which travel to the court. Although the rulings in these cases recognised grave physical and mental health harms and the violation of the rights of women caused by the denial of the option to terminate unwanted pregnancies, the relief provided to the individual petitioner significantly varied.
68. The expression "mental health" has a wide connotation and means much more than the absence of a mental impairment or a mental illness. The World Health Organisation defines "mental health" as a state of "mental well-being that enables people to cope with the stresses of life, realise their abilities, learn well and work well, and contribute to their community". [World Health Organisation, "Promoting Mental Health:
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 14 WP-40714-2025 Concepts, Emerging Evidence, Practice (Summary Report)"
(2004).] The determination of the status of one's mental health is located in one's self and experiences within one's environment and social context. Our understanding of the term "mental health" cannot be confined to medical terms or medical language, but should be understood in common parlance. The MTP Act itself recognises the need to look at the surrounding environment of the woman when interpreting injury to her health. Section 3(3) states that while interpreting "grave injury to her physical or mental health", account may be taken of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment. The consideration of a woman's "actual or reasonably foreseeable environment" becomes pertinent, especially when determining the risk of injury to the mental health of a woman."
11. If the aforesaid principles are applied to the present facts and circumstances of the case, then it is seen that the survivor is a rape victim. Admittedly, she was minor at the relevant time. The victim, her mother as well as elder sister have consented for termination of pregnancy, as is reflected from order-sheet dated 09/10/2025 of the Court below. Even the other family aspects are also required to be considered. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has permitted for termination of pregnancy in cases where the fetus have exceeded the age of 30 weeks. The same was followed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Victim X Vs. The Superintendent of Police Department, Bhopal (W. A. No.1078/2024) decided on 09.05.2024.
12. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as the consent given by the prosecutrix, her mother as well as her elder sister, this Court deems it appropriate to allow this petition permitting termination Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:51799 15 WP-40714-2025 of pregnancy subject to the following conditions:-
"(i) The procedure of termination of pregnancy will be carried out in the presence of the expert team of doctors. The expert doctors will explain to the family members as well as the petitioner the risk of getting the termination of her pregnancy and also other factors.
(ii) Every care and caution will be taken by the doctors while terminating the pregnancy. All medical attention and other medical facilities including that of a presence of a Pediatrician as well as a Radiologist and other required doctors will be made available to her.
(iii) The post operative care up to the extent required, will be extended to the petitioner. It will be the duty of the State Government to take care of the child, if born alive.
(iv) The doctors will also ensure that a sample from the fetus is protected for DNA examination and as and when required will be handed over to the prosecution for using in the criminal case itself.
(v) A specialized team of Doctors shall take a decision as to when to terminate the pregnancy. All necessary care and caution shall be taken by the Doctors while carrying out the procedure for termination of the pregnancy."
13. With the aforesaid observations, this petition is allowed and disposed off.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE Shbhnkr Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHUBHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 14-10-2025 18:59:39