[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
X Since Minor Thr. Mother vs Central Hospital Ulhasnagar And Anr on 16 February, 2026
Author: Bharati Dangre
Bench: Bharati Dangre
1/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
Salgaonkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MANDIRA MILIND Digitally signed by MANDIRA MILIND
SALGAONKAR
SALGAONKAR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Date: 2026.02.16 18:04:42 +0530
WRIT PETITION NO.2059 OF 2026
X since minor through mother .. Petitioner
Versus
Central Hospital Ulhasnagar & Anr. .. Respondents
...
Ms.Saloni Ghule for the Petitioner.
Smt.M.P.Thakur, A.G.P. for the State/Respondent.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 16th FEBRUARY, 2026
...
P.C:-
1. In continuation of our previous order, Mrs.Thakur,
learned Government Advocate has placed before us a report
from the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Thane dated
13/02/2026 in a sealed envelope.
The report is taken on record.
2. As directed by us, 'X' was examined by the District
Medical Board constituted under the Medical Termination of
Pregnancy Act, 1971 under the Chairmanship of the District
Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Thane, comprising of two
Gynecologists, one Pediatrician, Radiologist and Psychiatrist.
2/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
We have perused the report of the Medical Board
presented to us in Form D. The age of the woman seeking
termination of pregnancy is described to be 16 years and her
history is also noted to the effect that she is unmarried, 16
year old girl with clinically 30 to 32 with cephalic
presentation.
As per ultrasound conducted on 13/02/2026, it is
recorded that the same is suggestive of gravid uterus with
single viable fetus with cephalic presentation of 31 weeks 2
days, with foetal weight 1717 gms.
On examination, the report has opined that if the baby is
not delivered vaginally, it may require surgery and this risk is
explained to her relatives.
In the report from the Pediatric Department, the remark
is to the following effect :-
"If the pregnancy is terminated at this gestational age, baby will be
born alive, preterm and low birth weight and will need NICU care."
3. In the opinion of the Medical Board for termination of
pregnancy, there is a tick mark on clause 'denied'. Down below
is the justification for the said decision and on narrating the
history and with reference to the examination of 'X', it is noted
that the pregnant mother and her parents do not want to
continue the pregnancy and rather the woman is anguished
3/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
with pregnancy. It is recorded that they expressed their
desire to terminate and they were made aware about the
dangers of continuation of pregnancy as well as termination of
pregnancy.
The justification for the said decision further record that
continuation of pregnancy may lead to pregnancy related
complications like Anaemia, pregnancy induced
Hypertensions as well as complication during labour.
4. With the aforesaid justification offered, which do not
express any opinion as to what would be the health hazards
faced by the mother, if today she is permitted to terminate the
pregnancy, which has now crossed over 31 weeks and beyond
the legal limits of termination i.e. 24 weeks, there is no specific
comment offered.
The whole object of referring the woman to the Medical
Board, as she sought termination of her pregnancy, was to
ascertain whether the termination is possible, without she
facing any health risk of terminating the pregnancy at this
stage.
In column No.7 as to 'physical fitness of the woman for
termination of pregnancy', surprisingly there is a tick-mark on
column 'No'.
4/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
5. In the morning session, when the Petition was called out,
learned counsel for the Petitioner Ms.Ghule, on interacting
with the mother of 'X', expressed that they have decided that
'X' will give birth to the child and they will give the child in
adoption. But, considering that it should be the decision of the
woman, who is pregnant, we requested her to establish contact
with 'X' to ascertain about her will.
At 3.00 p.m., Ms.Ghule returned back with a disturbing
report that the girl was constantly crying on telephone and
she insisted that she do not want to continue with the
pregnancy. She also expressed her confusion about the
decision to be taken to Ms.Ghule, when she established contact
with her on telephone.
6. In a latest decision in the case of 'A'(mother of 'X') Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. delivered in Civil Appeal No.827
of 2026, when the Apex Court was confronted with a report of
the Medical Board where the minor daughter of the Appellant
was in her 28th week of pregnancy and the fetus did not
possess any congenital anomalies and the termination was
reported to be possible, the High Court had refused to grant
permission on the ground that the minor daughter had
attained majority and the child to be born to be given for
5/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
adoption and termination in the facts and circumstances
would amount to foeticide.
In the background facts the issue that arose for
consideration before the Hon'ble Apex Court was with regard
to the disinclination of the appellant's daughter to continue
with the pregnancy and give birth to a child, particularly when
she was carrying the pregnancy of 30 weeks. It is the
mother/appellant, who sought termination of the pregnancy,
as the continuation of pregnancy resulting in delivery would
be traumatic both, physically and mentally to the daughter
and adversely affect her future prospects.
Referring to the report of the Medical Board, which did
not indicate any grave risk to the appellant's daughter, if she is
permitted to terminate the pregnancy, the High Court had
expressed that the delivery could be attempted and the child
could be given in adoption.
However, this delicate issue was considered by Their
Lordships of the Apex Court and the focus of the matter was,
the right of the minor child i.e. the appellant's daughter to
continue the pregnancy, which is ex-facie outside marriage
and the child to be born to a pregnant woman who is stated to
be minor.
6/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
Without getting into the issue, whether the relationship
was consensual or whether it was a case of sexual assault, as
there was already an F.I.R. filed, the Apex Court emphasized
that ultimately the denominator is the fact that the child to be
born is not out of the wedlock, and secondly, the mother to the
child does not want to bear such a child. It was also expressed
that if the interest of the mother is to be taken note of then her
reproductive autonomy must be given sufficient emphasis and
the Court cannot compel any woman, much less a minor child
to complete her pregnancy, if she is otherwise not intending to
do so, as that would be more traumatic to a minor.
In the result, the appellant's daughter was permitted to
undergo medical termination of pregnancy, though the
pregnancy was advanced to 30 weeks.
7. Almost identical to the facts before the Hon'ble Apex
Court, we have a 16 years old unmarried pregnant mother,
who seek termination of pregnancy, which has advanced to 31
weeks 2 days.
Unfortunately, the report from the Civil Hospital Board
has not focused upon the risk, which would be posed by the
mother if she is to terminate the pregnancy at this advanced
stage.
7/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
We request Ms.Ghule appearing for the Petitioner to
make an attempt to establish contact with the Petitioner i.e.
the mother of the woman, who is seeking termination as well
as 'X' herself.
Apart from this, we direct 'X' to report to the Civil
Hospital, Thane and we expect the learned counsel to
communicate the order to her orally and she shall immediately
proceed to Civil Hospital, Thane. Upon she reaching there, if
required, she shall be again re-examined, so that Medical
Board can give us a clear opinion as to whether 'X' would
suffer any adverse consequences, on her health parameter i.e.
physical and psychological and whether termination of the
pregnancy at this stage, would involve any risk to her life.
We expect the clear opinion to be furnished to us by the
District Medical Board, based upon which,we would pronounce
upon whether the pregnancy shall be permitted to be
terminated.
8. We request Mrs.Thakur to communicate the order orally
to the Civil Hospital, Thane, who shall await the arrival of 'X'
in the hospital any time in the evening hours.
We are passing this unusual order, with a request to the
Members of the Board to be on their toes for examining the
8/8 5 WP-2059-26.odt
girl, as she is at advanced stage and every day is going to be
important for taking a final call about whether she be
permitted to terminate the pregnancy.
Mrs.Thakur shall impress upon the Board that they are
directed to act on the oral directions and non obtaining copy of
the order shall not be an excuse in not examining the girl
today.
Let the report be placed before us tomorrow at 11.00
a.m.
In the meantime, it is open for the counsel appearing for
the Petitioner to personally meet 'X' as well as the mother.
9. List on 17th February, 2026, under caption 'First on
Board'.
(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
