[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Ms X vs State Of Karnataka on 26 March, 2026

                                              -1-
                                                          NC: 2026:KHC:17370
                                                        WP No. 9387 of 2026


                   HC-KAR



                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                            DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                            BEFORE
                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
                            WRIT PETITION NO. 9387 OF 2026 (GM-RES)

                   BETWEEN:

                   MS X
                   NAME OF THE PETITIONER HAS NOT BEEN
                   DISCLOSED.
                   THE PETITIONER IS A MINOR AND
                   A VICTIM OF SEXUAL OFFENCE.
                   HENCE, NON-DISCLOSURE OF HER NAME
                   IS IN COMPLIANCE OF THE DIRECTIONS
                   PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN
                   W.P NO. 6763 OF 2020 AND OF
                   THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN NIPUN SAXENA VS.
                   UNION OF INDIA (2019) 2 SCC 703

                   THE PETITIONER IS REPRESENTED BY HER
                   MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
                   SMT. BASANTI BIST BHANDHARI,
Digitally signed
                   AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
by CHAITHRA A      W/O INDAR BAHADDUR,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF           RESIDING AT NO. 170,
KARNATAKA          NEAR BSPS GOVT. SCHOOL,
                   KUVEMPU MAIN ROAD,
                   KEMPAPURA, HEBBALA, BENGALURU,
                   KARNATAKA - 560024.
                                                                ...PETITIONER
                   (BY SMT. SHILPA PRASAD, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
                         VIDHANA SOUDHA,
                           -2-
                                     NC: 2026:KHC:17370
                                   WP No. 9387 of 2026


HC-KAR



     AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
     BENGALURU - 560001

2.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
     YELAHANKA PS, YELAHANKA SUB DIVISION,
     BENGALURU CITY.

3.   DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY,
     BENGALURU,
     GROUND FLOOR, CITY CIVIL COURT,
     BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560001.
     REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY

4.   VANI VILAS HOSPITAL,
     VICTORIA HOSPITAL COMPOUND, FORT,
     K.R.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002
     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SURGEON.

5.   CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE, BENGALURU
     HOMBEGOWDA NAGAR,
     BENGALURU, KARNATAKA- 560029.
     REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRPERSON

6.   DISTRICT CHILDREN PROTECTION UNIT
     DHARAMARAM COLLEGE POST,
     BESIDE KIDVAY HOSPITAL,
     WELFARE DEPARTMENT COMPLEX,
     DR. MH MARIGOWDA ROAD,
     HOSUR RD, BENGALURU,
     KARNATAKA-560029.
     REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT CHILD
     PROTECTION OFFICER.
                                         ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT
OF   MANDAMUS     AND    CONSEQUENTLY    DIRECT   THE
RESPONDENT NO. 4 TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO
                             -3-
                                         NC: 2026:KHC:17370
                                       WP No. 9387 of 2026


HC-KAR



TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY OF THE PETITIONERS DAUGHTER
AND ETC.

     THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

                      ORAL ORDER

The captioned petition is filed seeking a direction

against respondent No. 4 to take necessary steps to

terminate the pregnancy of petitioner's daughter.

2. On filing of this petition, this Court had directed

respondent No. 4-Vani Vilas Hospital to constitute a Board

and examine the victim and send a opinion as to whether

the medical termination of pregnancy is feasible in the

case of hand.

3. Today, learned AGA has placed on record the

opinion rendered by the Board constituted by the Medical

Superintendent of 4th Respondent/Hospital. The said

medical opinion is taken on record.

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

4. The Board is clearly of the opinion that the

period of gestation is 30 weeks plus 3 days and the

estimated foetal weight is 1,455 grams, indicating viable

foetus. The Board has also opined that the victim is

17 years old and termination of pregnancy at this

advanced gestational age may pose significant risk and

adverse perinatal outcomes for the neonate.

5. The law relating to termination of pregnancy in

India is governed by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy

Act, 1971, as amended by the Medical Termination of

Pregnancy (Amendment) Act, 2021 (for short "the Act").

6. 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.

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

7. 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.

8. 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 opinion regarding risk to the life or

health of the pregnant woman or severe foetal

abnormalities.

9. 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.

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

10. 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.

11. However, the consistent thread running through

the aforesaid decisions is that Courts have relied upon the

opinion of competent Medical Boards 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.

12. In the present case, the pregnancy has

advanced to 30 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.

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

13. 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 baby. The same is extracted which reads

as under:

" As patient has already crossed 30 weeks + 3 days +-

3 weeks of gestation, she can be allowed to continue till

term so that baby maturity will be completed and the

prematurity of the new born and associated

complications can be avoided. Planning the delivery

now or at term will not alter the maternal outcome."

In view of the opinion expressed by the Board, this Court

is of the view that medical termination as pleaded in the

captioned petition cannot be acceded to.

14. 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:

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

(i) The respondent-Hospital shall ensure that the

victim receives continuous medical supervision and

appropriate antenatal care until delivery.

(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

NC: 2026:KHC:17370

HC-KAR

steps in accordance with law for care and adoption of

the child.