By Pradyumna Satish 

The petitioner, the mother of a 16-year-old minor girl, approached the court seeking permission for the medical termination of her daughter’s pregnancy. On 07.01.2025, the petitioner learned of her daughter’s pregnancy, which resulted from a relationship with one Dhilip. A criminal case was subsequently registered against him under Sections 5(1), 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. 

The petitioner stated that her daughter, who is currently in the 12th standard, wishes to terminate the pregnancy to continue her education and attend her upcoming board examinations. Due to her anemic condition, the minor underwent a blood transfusion at the Primary Health Centre in Wallajah on 16.01.2025. However, the center lacked the facilities for a medical termination of pregnancy (MTP), leading to her admission at the second respondent hospital. 

Upon evaluation, hospital authorities informed the petitioner that the pregnancy had exceeded 24 weeks and that an MTP could only be performed with specific court approval. Given the urgency of the situation and her daughter’s educational commitments, the petitioner sought the court’s intervention to allow the termination. 

The court’s rationale for allowing the medical termination of pregnancy (MTP) primarily centered on the best interests, bodily autonomy, and reproductive rights of the minor girl. The court emphasized that since the victim is a minor, her consent alone is not legally sufficient, but her mother, as the sole caretaker and guardian under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, is legally authorized to provide consent for the procedure. The court clarified that the definition of ‘guardian’ in the MTP Act should be applied independently and need not align with definitions in other laws such as the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. 

The court also recognized the minor’s right to make decisions regarding her own body, affirming that reproductive autonomy is an essential part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Citing Supreme Court and High Court precedents, the court stressed that a woman’s (including a minor’s) choice to terminate a pregnancy must be given primacy, particularly when there are no medical contraindications to the procedure. Given that the minor girl clearly expressed her desire to terminate the pregnancy before the Magistrate and that medical authorities confirmed the procedure could be safely carried out, the court found no impediment to granting the petition. 

Additionally, the court noted that the pregnancy resulted from an alleged sexual assault, but it did not delve into the criminal liability of the accused, as the matter was under investigation. However, to aid the ongoing investigation, the court directed that the fetus be preserved for DNA or medical testing. The court ruled that MTP should be performed promptly in the best interests of the minor girl while ensuring due process in the related criminal proceedings. 

In this case, the court prioritized the best interests, bodily autonomy, and reproductive rights of the minor girl while ensuring compliance with legal and medical considerations. Recognizing that the minor had unequivocally expressed her desire to terminate the pregnancy and that her mother, as her legal guardian, had consented, the court upheld her right to make decisions about her own body. 

The court directed the Dean of the second respondent Medical College to arrange for the medical termination of the minor girl’s pregnancy as expeditiously as possible, considering her best interests. It also ordered the preservation of the fetus for potential DNA or medical examination in connection with the ongoing criminal investigation under the POCSO Act. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of. 

Case Title: XYZ v. The Inspector of Police & Ors. 

Citation: W.P.No.2237/2025 

Click here to read/download the judgement.