1
2026:CGHC:10397
AVANISH
KUMAR
PATHAK NAFR
Digitally signed by
AVANISH KUMAR
PATHAK
Date: 2026.02.27
18:36:22 +0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 773 of 2026
1 - Xyz D/o Xyz, R/o Xys (Details Of The Petitioner Is Given In Attested
Closed Envelop)
.. Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Department Of Health And
Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - The Chief Medical Officer, (C.M.O.)/ Medical Board Of District Hospital
Korba, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Head Officer Of Department Gynaecologist, (H.O.D.) Gynaic, District
Hospital, Korba, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. Govt. Adv.
(Hon'ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Order on Board
27-2-2026
1. Petitioner is an adult lady, victim of sexual exploitation of Crime No.
2
34/2025 registered at Police Station Lemru, District Korba for the offence
under Section 69 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, has filed
instant writ petition seeking following reliefs :-
10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondent authorities to get examined the
petitioner and thereafter medically terminate her
pregnancy.;
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondent authorities to provide for post-
surgical treatment and care to the petitioner after the
termination her pregnancy.
10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondent No. 01 to bear the expenses of the
aforesaid procedure.
10.4 Any other order/direction as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
case may also be issued, in the interest of justice.'
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner, is
an adult lady aged about 33-34 years, has been sexually exploited by the
accused, therefore, FIR bearing Crime No.34/2025 has been registered at
Police Station Lemru, Distt. Korba against accused, who is distant relative of
the victim. After lodging FIR, the petitioner was medically examined by Sweta
Hospital, Korba, in which, vide Sonography report Ex. P-2 dated 1-2-2026 it
was reported that, petitioner is carrying pregnancy of 14 weeks 6 days.
Learned counsel further submits that, the petitioner does not want to deliver
child of sexual abuse as she is a divorced lady and she is already having a
daughter. It is further contended that the pregnancy of child may be
detrimental to the life of petitioner and may also have significant physical,
emotion, social and economic consequences to her. Therefore, she does not
3
want to carry on pregnancy and deliver child, as such, she has filed instant
petition seeking permission of this court for termination of her pregnancy.
3. When the case came-up for hearing before this Court on 19-2-2026
and 23-2-2026, this Court has directed the Chief Medical and Health Officer,
Korba, Distt. Korba (Chhattisgarh) to submit report with opinion with regard to
medical termination of pregnancy of petitioner upon which, the Chief Medical
& Health Officer, Korba has submitted report alongwith examination report
and the report prepared by Team of doctors. Aforesaid report has been
produced by learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State before this
Court.
4. Perusal of report and documents show that, the team of doctors have
opined that physical and mental status examination of the petitioner appears
normal and victim's gestational age is 17 weeks 1 day, (second trimester) as
on 25-2-2026. It has further been opined that second trimester termination of
pregnancy has associated risk like excessive bleeding, shock, ICU admission
and very rare mortality, current state of pregnancy is normal but future course
of pregnancy and associated risks could not be predicted.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the state submits that since the
petitioner is sexually exploited victim, which of which she conceived, but she
does not want to carry on her pregnancy. Therefore, it may be presumed that
if permission is not granted, then it would cause grave injury to the mental
health of petitioner, as such, relief sought for may be granted to her.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
4
available on record including medical report submitted by Chief Medical &
Health Officer/Team of doctors, Korba Distt. Korba (Chhattisgarh).
7. Issue involved in the instant case is termination of pregnancy, which is
governed by the provisions of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
(henceforth, Act, 1971). Section 3 of the said Act provides for termination of
pregnancy by registered medical practitioner under the circumstances, as has
been envisaged therein, which is reproduced 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."
[ In section 3 of the principal Act, for sub-section (2), the
following sub-sections have been substituted vide Amendment
Act, 2021, No. 8. of 2021]
"(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), a pregnancy
may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner,--
(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,
5
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
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 pregnancy would
involve such risk of injury to the health as is mentioned in
subsection (2), account may be taken to the pregnant woman's
actual or reasonable 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. From perusal of aforesaid provisions, it is evidently clear that it is not
that termination of pregnancy is not impermissible at all, rather it is
permissible in the given circumstances as is envisaged under Section 3 of the
Act, 1971. In instant case, petitioner is an adult lady aged about 33-34 years,
she is victim of sexual exploitation and she does not want to carry on her
pregnancy & deliver child. Team of doctors have reported that gestational age
is 17 week 1 day (second trimester), though it has also been opined by the
doctors that second trimester termination of pregnancy has associated risks
like excessive bleeding, shock/ICU admission, but further opined that very
rare case of mortality. It has further been opined that, further course of
pregnancy and associated risks could not be predicted
9. Having considered aforesaid facts, as has been stated above, it
cannot be denied that continuation of pregnancy can lead to complication at a
later stage on both the count, so far as the physical condition of the victim
and also the psychological and mental condition is concerned. It has been
opined by the doctors that, physical and mental status of petitioner victim is
normal.
10. In the case of "Suchita Srivastav & Another v. Chandigarh
Administration" reported in (2009) 9 SCC 1 , their Lordships of the Supreme
Court in paragraphs 36 & 37 has held as under:-
"36. Courts in other common law jurisdictions have
developed two distinct standards while exercising "parens
patriae" jurisdiction for the purpose of making reproductive
decisions on behalf of mentally retarded persons. These two
standards are the "best interests" test and the "substituted
judgment" test.
37. As evident from its literal description, the "best
interests" test requires the Court to ascertain the course of
action which would serve the best interests of the person in
question. In the present setting this means that the Court must
undertake a careful inquiry of the medical opinion on the
feasibility of the pregnancy as well as social circumstances
faced by the victim. It is important to note that the Court's
decision should be guided by the interests of the victim alone
and not those of the other stakeholders such as guardians or
the society in general. It is evident that the woman in question
will need care and assistance which will in turn entail some
costs. However, that cannot be a ground for denying the
exercise of reproductive rights."
11. Likewise, again in the case of "X v. Union of India & others" reported
in (2016) 14 SCC 382 in paragraph No. 13 it has been held as under: -
"13. Having perused the medical report (relevant extracts
whereof have been reproduced hereinabove), we are satisfied
that a clear finding has been recorded by the Medical Board,
that the risk to the petitioner of continuation of her pregnancy
can gravely endanger her physical and mental health. The
Medical Board has also expressed an advice that the patient
should not continue with the pregnancy. In view of the findings
recorded in Para 6 of the report, coupled with the
recommendation and advice tendered by the Medical Board,
we are satisfied that it is permissible to allow the petitioner to
terminate her pregnancy in terms of Section 5 of the Medical
Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. In view of the above, we
grant liberty to the petitioner, if she is so advised, to terminate
her pregnancy."
12. The aforesaid judgment in the case of "X v. Union of India & others"
the request for termination of pregnancy was in a case where the pregnancy
was of more than 20 weeks. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further in the recent
past have permitted termination of pregnancy in matters, where the
pregnancy was more than 20 weeks. A few judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court are reported in 2017 (3) SCC 458 (X and others v. Union of
India and others), 2017 (3) SCC 462 (Meera Santosh Pal and others v.
Union of India and others), AIR 2017 SC 3931 (Tapasya Umesh Pisal v.
Union of India and others) and AIR 2017 SC 4037 (Mrs. A v. Union of
India and others). In all these cases the age of the fetus were more than 20
weeks and taking into consideration the over all condition of the victim, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court permitted termination of pregnancy.
13. In the instant case, the petitioner was carrying pregnancy of 17 weeks
1 day on 25-2-2026. She has been victimized by sexual assault. It is also
stated that she is a divorced lady and already having a child, it also appears
that the petitioner belongs to poor financial strata. In such circumstances, if
the victim is permitted to undergo entire process of pregnancy and delivery,
then it can lead to great physical, mental and psychological effect, not only on
the victim, but also so far as the foetus is concerned.
14. This Court in WPC No. 270/2018 (Ku. Pooja Mandavi v. State of
Chhattisgarh and others) decided on 02.02.2018 in paragraph No. 23 in a
similar situation allowing the writ petition has held as under:
"23. Taking into consideration the entire facts including her age
(13 years) and circumstances what has been stated by the
victim, her gestational age, judicial precedents, taking into
consideration her adolescent pregnancy and risk involved in
childbirth, medical condition of the victim / petitioner, as she is
suffering anemia and sickle cell (trait), considering the fact that
the fetus if allowed to born, would have a limited life span with
serious handicaps, and that as per Explanation I appended to
sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act of 1971 mental agony of a
rape victim (petitioner) has to be treated as a case of grave
injury, particularly taking into consideration that it is in the best
interests of the victim alone which has to be kept in view and
considering the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act of 1971
and Explanation I that the termination of pregnancy is
immediately necessary to save the life of a pregnant girl like the
petitioner herein, in the interest of justice, it would be proper to
direct that a team of five doctors shall consider the feasibility of
termination of pregnancy at this gestational age. Accordingly, the
writ petition is allowed ...................
15. Given the facts and circumstances of the instant case and further
referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "A v.
Union of India" 2018 (14) SCC 75 and also "Sarmishtha Chakraborthy and
Another v. Union of India" 2018 (13) SCC 339 permitted termination of
pregnancy at the stage where the victim was carrying pregnancy for around
26 weeks. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of " Murugan nayakkar v.
Union of India and others" 2017 SCC Online 1092", considering the fact
that the victim of rape must be given that much of liberty and right to decide
whether she should continue with the pregnancy or she should be permitted
to terminate the pregnancy.
16. The petitioner victim of sexual exploitation herself carry stigma in her
life. In facts situation of the case, if she is not permitted to terminate her
pregnancy, which is result of sexual exploitation, then it would be against her
liberty and right to decide whether she continues with the pregnancy or not ?
17. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition seeking permission for
medical termination of pregnancy of petitioner, is allowed. Petitioner victim is
permitted to approach Chief Medical and Health Officer, Korba, along with her
guardian/ relative, who (CMHO, Korba) in turn, shall ensure that pregnancy of
petitioner be terminated as per provisions of the Act, 1971 after completing
all the other requisite formalities required for the same and provide proper
medical facilities. The Chief Medical and Health Officer, Korba is further
directed that termination of pregnancy of the petitioner be done under the
supervision of at-least two registered medical practitioners including
Specialist Doctors in the field of Department of Gynecology following the
provisions of the Act, 1971, ensuring that the DNA sample of the foetus shall
also be taken and preserved for further evidence of criminal case.
18. Let this exercise be carried out without any further delay. The petitioner
is directed to approach before the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Korba Distt.
Korba on 28-2-2026 for the aforesaid purpose. The Chief Medical & Health
Officer, Korba shall further take all necessary steps. The State Counsel is
also directed to intimate the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Korba as regard
the next course of action that has to be taken.
19. It is also observed that Station House Officer of Police Station Korba,
District Korba shall cooperate with the Chief Medical & Health Officer, Korba
for the aforesaid purpose.
20. The examination report submitted by State Counsel so far as the health
condition of the petitioner, shall be made part of the record.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
pathak
