‘Played With Life Of A Rape Victim’: Allahabad HC Orders Inquiry After Hospital Performs C-Section Despite Termination Order

The Allahabad High Court has ordered an inquiry into the conduct of doctors at a Prayagraj government hospital after a minor rape survivor, whose pregnancy the court had directed to be medically terminated, was instead delivered by Caesarean section after an attempted induction failed.

A bench of Justices Ajit Kumar and Garima Prashad said the doctors were prima facie guilty of "deliberate negligence" in failing to comply with the court's September 21 order and directed the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health, Uttar Pradesh, to personally conduct an inquiry and submit a report within two weeks.

Why did the high court permit termination of the minor's pregnancy?

The case concerned a minor girl whose pregnancy was alleged to have resulted from sexual assault. Court had earlier noted that the pregnancy had crossed 24 weeks and that a medical board had been constituted on the directions of the Special POCSO Court in Prayagraj.

The Medical Board's subsequent report placed the gestational age at approximately 29 weeks and two days. It said the foetus had crossed the stage of viability and that, because the pregnancy was high-risk, both its continuation and termination carried medical risks.

The girl, whose age was about 13 years according to her Aadhaar card, was assessed through radiological examination to be about 16 years but below 17. The Board recorded that she understood the nature and consequences of termination and had expressed her desire not to continue the pregnancy, saying that its continuation would further harm her mental health.

The high court said reproductive choice, bodily autonomy, dignity and mental health were relevant considerations under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.

"Having regard to the minor's age, the circumstances in which the pregnancy occurred, her physical and psychological condition, and the unequivocal wishes expressed by her and her natural guardians," court held that her welfare would be served by permitting termination.

It consequently directed S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj, to carry out the termination on September 22 through the safest medically permissible procedure, with specialist doctors and necessary safeguards. The State was also directed to bear the expenses of her transportation, treatment and post-procedural care.

What happened at the Prayagraj hospital?

On September 23, court was informed that its order had not been complied with. It summoned the Head of the Department of Gynaecology, the Medical Superintendent and other doctors to explain the circumstances.

The acting Head of Department, Dr Vandana Ojha, told the court that induction for medical termination through the vaginal passage was started on the evening of September 22. When the induction failed, the hospital decided to deliver the baby through Caesarean section.

The baby was subsequently admitted to the Children's Hospital.

Dr Aiman Abbasi, who performed the surgery, told the court that conventional medical termination could not take place because of complications and that Caesarean delivery was therefore undertaken. However, she could not disclose who had authorised the surgery. Dr Ojha also did not state that she had directed the Caesarean delivery.

Court also noted that the hospital authorities had been informed of its order. The Medical Superintendent said she had communicated the order to the Head of the Gynaecology Department at 11:30 am on September 22. She further stated that the department head left the station around midnight.

The State Law Officer told the court that the department head had informed her that she had left Prayagraj to conduct an examination at Patna.

Court also considered the allegation by the minor's mother that hospital staff had demanded money for medicines, tests and other expenses despite the court's direction that the State bear all costs. It said the allegation would have to be verified after obtaining the other side's version.

The bench further noted a discrepancy regarding the minor's arrival at the hospital. While the petitioner claimed she reached around 11 am with the investigating officer, the doctor stated that she was admitted at 4:45 pm. Court observed that this showed "virtually no attempt at all" since the morning of September 22.

Court orders inquiry into doctors' role

The high court said the doctors involved were prima facie guilty of deliberate negligence and observed that it was a case where proceedings could be drawn against them for "having played with the life of a rape victim" whose application was for medical termination of pregnancy.

The bench questioned why the induction method had failed and why the Head of the Gynaecology Department had left the station without explanation. It also noted that the doctor who performed the Caesarean had not disclosed who authorised the procedure.

Court ordered the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health, to personally inquire into the matter and fix responsibility after examining the doctors, the minor, her mother and the investigating officer. The report is to be submitted in a sealed cover within two weeks.

Meanwhile, court directed the hospital to bear all expenses relating to the delivery and post-natal care of the mother and baby. It ordered that the baby remain in the Children Hospital and not be handed over to anyone without the court's permission.

The matter will next be heard on October 12. The Medical Superintendent, Chief Medical Officer, a doctor named Dr Priyank Chaurasia and the investigating officer have been directed to remain present.

Case Title: X (Minor Victim) vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others

Order Date: September 23, 2026

Bench: Justices Ajit Kumar and Garima Prashad