Madhya Pradesh High Court
Victim X vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 March, 2026
Author: Vishal Mishra
Bench: Vishal Mishra
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499
1 WP-9955-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 20th OF MARCH, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 9955 of 2026
VICTIM X
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Ms. Papiya Ghosh - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri A.S. Baghel - Govt. Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :
(i) That, by issuance of a writ of quo warranto and mandamus, direction be issued for terminate the pregnancy occurred by petitioner's daughter, in the interest of justice.
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus to direct that if the medical board not concern the termination of pregnancy after the delivery the child should be handed over to the responsible person or society because of the petitioner daughter is minor and petitioner is also not capable to supported to the child, therefore this Hon'ble Court given best opportunity to the future of minor child, in the interest of justice.
(iii) That, any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded together with awarding the cost of these proceedings.
2. The facts of the case, in substance, are that the victim who is a minor daughter of the petitioner aged about 15 years is a rape victim. It is alleged that the victim was sexually assaulted and raped by accused against which an FIR as Crime No. 106 of 2026 for the offences under Sections 65(1), 64(2)
(m), 64(2)(f) of the BNS and Section 5l/6 of the POCSO Act has been registered at Police Station Koh-e-Fiza District Bhopal (M.P.). During Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 2 WP-9955-2026 medical examination, the victim was found to be pregnant.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner's daughter being a rape victim, is having every right to get the termination of her pregnancy. The report of the Medical Board/MTP Committee comprising of HODs of Pediatrics, Radiodiagnosis, Medicine, Pathology and Obstetrics and Gynecology of the Gandhi Medical College dated 20.03.2026 is produced before this Court, the relevant extracts thereof read as follows :
The gestational age of the fetus is more than 24 weeks (as per ultrasound) hence medical termination can not be performed as per MTP act amendment 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. 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 the anticipated and unanticipated complications in relation to termination of Rh negative teenage pregnancy (high risk), provided risk of termination is same at this gestation and full term pregnancy. 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. The relevant provisions under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 which deal with the cases of termination of pregnancy are as under:
3. When pregnancies may be terminated by registered medical Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 3 WP-9955-2026 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,--
(a) ...
(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) ...
...
5. Sections 3 and 4 when not to apply . - (1) The provisions of Section 4, and so much of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 3 as relate to the length of the pregnancy and the opinion of not less than two registered medical practitioners, shall not apply to the termination of a pregnancy by a registered medical practitioner in a case where he is of opinion, formed in good faith, that the termination of such pregnancy is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman.
6. Regarding the consent, in the case of A vs State of Maharashtra, reported in (2024) 6 SCC 327, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under
:
"25. From a perusal of the MTP Act, its Statement of Objects and Reasons as well as the recommendation of the Shah Committee which examined the issue of liberalising abortion laws in India, [Report of the Committee to Study the Question of Legalisation of Abortion, Ministry of Health and Family Planning, Government of India, dated December 1966.] two clear postulates emerge as to the legislative intent of the MTP Act. Firstly, the health of the woman is paramount. This includes the risk avoided from the woman not availing unsafe and illegal methods of abortion. Secondly, disallowing termination does not stop abortions, it only stops safe and accessible abortions. The opinion of the RMP and the Medical Board must balance the legislative mandate of the MTP Act and the fundamental right of the pregnant person seeking a termination of the pregnancy. However, as noticed above and by this Court in X v. State (NCT of Delhi) [X v. State (NCT of Delhi), Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 4 WP-9955-2026 (2023) 9 SCC 433] the fear of prosecution among RMPs acts as a barrier for pregnant people in accessing safe abortion. Further, since the MTP Act only allows abortion beyond twenty-four weeks if the foetus is diagnosed with substantial abnormalities, the Medical Board opines against termination of pregnancy merely by stating that the threshold under Section 3(2-B) of the MTP Act is not satisfied. The clarificatory report dated 3-4-2024 fell into this error by denying termination on the ground that the gestational age of the foetus is above twenty-four weeks and there are no congenital abnormalities in the foetus.
....
35. In Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn. [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 [Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn., (2009) 9 SCC 1 : (2009) 3 SCC (Civ) 570] 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 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.
7. 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 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 5 WP-9955-2026 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 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 Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499
6 WP-9955-2026 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.
8. If the aforesaid proposition of law is applied to the facts of the present case, then it is seen that the choice to continue pregnancy to term, regardless of the court having allowed termination of the pregnancy, belongs to the individual alone. Further, the consent of the pregnant person in matters of reproductive choices and abortion is paramount. Even the MTP Act, particularly clause (4) of Section 3, speaks of the same. As already pointed out hereinabove that clause (4)(b) of Section 3 of the MTP Act clearly provides for that "... no pregnancy shall be terminated except with the consent of the pregnant woman".
9. In the present case, the petitioner's daughter is a rape victim. She is carrying pregnancy of more than 29 weeks and has been caused on account of the girl being raped. The counselling report of the victim and her parents is produced by the State counsel which reads as under :
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 7 WP-9955-2026 Counselling Report of Victim काउं सिलंग करने पर बािलका ने बताया क उसके मामा ारा उसके साथ जबरज ती गलत काम कया गया और डर धमकाकर 5-6 बार-बह ं घटना क । 6 माह तक जब मुझे पी रयड नह ं आया तब माता उसे हॉ पटल ले गई वहां पता चला क वह 29 स ाह क गभवती है । उसने बताया क वह अभी 9th क पर ा दे रह है और वह इस ब चे को रखना नह ं चाहती य क वह अभी आगे पढ़ना चाहती है ।
उसे बताया गया क अभी गभ म यादा मह ने हो गए है गभपात क परिमशन नह ं िमलने पर ब चे का ज म हुआ तो ब चा CWC के मा यम से िशशु गृह म रखवा दया जा सकता ह।
Counselling Report of Mother बािलका क माता से बातचीत करने पर उसने बताया क वह घरे लू कामकाज करती है पित मजदरू करती है । मेर बेट *** जो क क ा 9th म पढ़ती है , जब उसे 6 माह तक पी रय स नह ं आए तो म उसे हॉ पटल लेकर गई जहां डॉ टर ने उसके 29 स ाह क गभवती बताया पूछने पर उसने बताया क उसके मामा ारा उसके साथ 6-7 बार गलत काम कया गया था। इसके बाद कभी कोहे फजा थाने म FIR दज हुई। गभाव था समा करने को लेकर जब उनसे बात क गई तो उ ह ने कहा क बेट अभी नाबािलग है और पढ़ाई कर रह है । ब चे क ज मेदार नह ं उठा सकती इसिलए हम उसका एबोसन कराना चाहते ह। उसक माता को उसके वा य को लेकर बात क गई। उ ह बताया गया क य द गभपात न होने क थित म ब चा होता है तो उसे CWC के मा यम से िशशु गृह म रखवाया जा सकता है ।
Counselling Report of Father बािलका के पता से बात करने पर उ होने बताया क वह मजदरू करते ह उनके 3 ब चे है उनक बड़ बेट *** को जब हॉ पटल जांच के िलए ले जाया गया तब वहां पता चला क वह 29 स ाह क गभवती है । चू ं क वह अभी केवल 15 वष क है और 9th म पढ़ रह है हम उसका गभव था समा करवाना चाहते ह। उ ह बताया गया क समय यादा हो जाने के कारण हाई कोट से परिमशन लेना पडता है उ होने कहा क म इसके िलए तैयार हू।ँ उ ह बताया गया क य द हाई कोट से एवोशन क परिमशन नह ं िमलेगी तो ब चा होने क थित म ब चे को CWC ारा िशशु गृह म रखवाया जा सकता है । उ ह बािलका के वा य को कर भी समझाइश द गई।
10. The other family aspects are also required to be considered in such cases. The documents produced by the State counsel are taken on record. Under these circumstances, as the victim and her parents have shown their willingness for termination of pregnancy and following the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid cases, this Court deems it appropriate to permit the termination of pregnancy of the victim subject to the following directions :
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 8 WP-9955-2026
(i) The victim along with her parents to remain present before the Gandhi Medical College Bhopal at the earliest, today or tomorrow, so that the termination of pregnancy can be carried out as expeditiously as possible. A specialised team of Doctors shall take a decision regarding termination of pregnancy.
(ii) 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 victim the risk of getting the termination of her pregnancy and also other factors.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The post operative care up to the extent required, will be extended to the victim. It will be the duty of the State Government to take care of the child, if born alive.
(v) 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.
(vi) All necessary care and caution be taken by the doctors while carrying out the procedure for termination of pregnancy.
(vii) Considering the finding of the Medical Board, the Hospital and its medical team would take care to ensure sensitive treatment Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:23499 9 WP-9955-2026 and handling of the petitioner in connection with all procedures, whether medical or administrative, keeping her emotional and mental health at the forefront.
(viii) The copy of the order be supplied to the Dean, Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal for further action.
11. It is made clear that in case the victim and her parents are not ready to keep the child if born alive, then they may hand over the child to the State authorities/CWC after a period of 15 days from the date of his/her birth. The child if born alive will remain with the mother/victim for 15 days from date of birth for the purpose of breast feeding. The CWC will be at liberty to give the child on adoption to any willing family in accordance with law. The State authorities are directed to ensure the privacy of the victim and any information including family details should not be published in any form of media which could lead to the identification of the victim. The said directions are being issued looking to the welfare of the child so that his/her upbringing can be taken care of.
12. In above terms, the petition is disposed of finally.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the counsel for the State, Special Judge and Superintendent of Police, Bhopal for further action.
(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE VV Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD VISHWAKARMA Signing time: 20-03-2026 18:15:18