from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
2. Considering the urgency involved and the
(i) the gestational age of the foetus;
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
(ii) whether termination of pregnancy could be
safely undertaken; and
(iii) the risks, if any, to the life and health of the
victim.
3. Pursuant to the directions issued by this
Court, the Medical Board examined the victim and has
submitted its report today. The Medical Board has
opined that the pregnancy has reached approximately
34 weeks of gestation, which is well beyond the stage
of foetal viability. The Board has further opined that
induction for termination at this stage would pose
serious risk to the life of the mother and the baby, and
therefore termination is not medically advisable.
4. The law relating to termination of pregnancy
in India is governed by the Medical Termination of
Pregnancy Act, 1971, as amended by the Medical
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
Termination of Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021 (for
short "the Act").
5. Under Section 3 of the Act, pregnancy may
ordinarily be terminated up to 20 weeks on the
opinion of one registered medical practitioner and up
to 24 weeks on the opinion of two registered medical
practitioners for certain categories of women, which
include survivors of sexual assault and minors.
6. Section 5 of the Act provides an exception
permitting termination beyond the prescribed limit
only when such termination is immediately necessary
to save the life of the pregnant woman.
7. In cases where pregnancy has crossed the
statutory limit, constitutional Courts exercising
jurisdiction under Article 226 or Article 32 of the
Constitution of India, have entertained petitions
seeking termination, primarily based on medical
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
opinion regarding risk to the life or health of the
pregnant woman or severe foetal abnormalities.
8. In X v. Union of India (2024) 12 SCC
453, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that Courts may
permit termination beyond the statutory limit where
continuation of pregnancy would endanger the life of
the woman and the medical report does not disclose
any substantial foetal abnormalities.
9. In X v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2025 SCC
OnLine Del 2506, the Division bench of Delhi High
court overturned a single judge's order allowing a 16-
year-old survivor of sexual assault to terminate her
26-week pregnancy, and directed her to continue the
same till 34 weeks.
10. However, the consistent threat running
through the aforesaid decisions is that Courts have
relied upon the opinion of competent Medical Boards
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
while deciding whether termination can be safely
undertaken. Where the Medical Board has opined that
termination would pose serious risk to the life of the
pregnant woman, Courts have refrained from
permitting such termination.
11. In the present case, the pregnancy has
advanced to 34 weeks, which is well beyond the stage
of foetal viability. At this stage, the foetus is capable
of survival outside the womb with appropriate
neonatal care.
12. The Medical Board constituted pursuant to
the directions of this Court has categorically opined
that induction for termination at this stage would be
dangerous to the life of the mother as well as the
baby. The same is extracted which reads as under:
"Based on the above examination and opinions Miss X,
d/o Suresh, Primigravida with 35+1weeks of gestation for
the medical board is of the opinion that patient has already
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
crossed 35 weeks of gestation, she can be allowed to
continue till term so that baby maturity will be completed
and prematurity of the baby can be avoided. Planning the
delivery now or at term will not alter the maternal outcome.
However, as the survivor & attenders are not sure about
continuing the pregnancy and as the survivor has been
diagnosed with post traumatic stress disorder (As per
psychiatrist opinion). The decision to terminate the
pregnancy can be considered depending on survivor & her
attenders' decision."
13. In the present case, this Court has carefully
examined the report and opinion furnished by the duly
constituted Medical Board. The Board, after conducting
a detailed medical examination of the victim and
assessing the stage of pregnancy, has unequivocally
opined that termination of pregnancy at the present
stage would pose serious medical risks and would be
medically unsafe. The expert opinion indicates that the
procedure may endanger the life and health of the
minor and therefore cannot be safely undertaken.
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
14. When such a clear and categorical medical
opinion is placed on record, this Court, while
exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, cannot disregard the expert
medical assessment. In the absence of any material
indicating that termination can be safely performed,
this Court finds no justification to issue a direction for
medical termination of pregnancy.
15. Though this Court is deeply conscious of the
traumatic circumstances in which the victim has
conceived, particularly in view of the alleged sexual
assault attracting the provisions of the POCSO Act, the
paramount consideration must be the safety and
survival of the victim.
16. In view of the advanced gestational age of
34 weeks, the pregnancy has crossed the stage where
termination could be medically treated as an abortion
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
procedure. At this stage, medical intervention would
essentially amount to preterm delivery, which, as per
the Medical Board, carries serious risk to both the
mother and the baby.
17. Therefore, this Court finds no justification to
issue directions permitting termination of pregnancy
contrary to the medical opinion placed on record.
18. Having regard to the peculiar facts of the
case and the status of the victim as a minor survivor
of sexual assault, the following directions are issued:
(i) The respondent-Hospital shall ensure
that the victim receives continuous medical
supervision and appropriate antenatal care until
delivery.
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
(ii) The respondent-hospital shall take all
necessary precautions to ensure safe delivery
and neonatal care.
(iii) The Child Welfare Committee and
District Child Protection Unit shall extend
counselling, psychological assistance and
rehabilitation support to the victim.
(iv) The State shall ensure that the victim
is extended the benefit of compensation under
the Victim Compensation Scheme and other
welfare measures available under law.
(v) If the victim or her guardians express
inability or unwillingness to raise the child after
birth, the Child Welfare Committee shall take
appropriate steps in accordance with law for care
and adoption of the child.
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:15358
HC-KAR
(vi) The respondent-hospital shall preserve
relevant medical evidence, if required, for the
purposes of the criminal proceedings.
(vii) Learned AGA is directed to forthwith
communicate this order orally to the concerned
respondents.
The writ petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
CA
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 20
