Supreme Court Refuses AIIMS Curative Plea Against Minor Rape Survivor’s Pregnancy Termination, Reaffirms Patient Autonomy

The Supreme Court today refused a curative plea filed by AIIMS against court's decision from April 24 permitting a 15-year-old Delhi girl to terminate her over 28-week pregnancy.

Noting that doctors cannot decide on behalf of their patients, the bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati to talk to the parents of the minor girl and try to persuade them if they wish to reconsider. "You do not have to come back to us..let the parents decide..let's not make medical personnels become the masters of the will of the people..DOCTORS CANNOT DECIDE FOR THEIR PATIENTS..", Justice Bagchi told ASG Bhati.

AIIMS approached the Supreme Court with the prayer that since it had already been a pregnancy of 30 weeks, the minor girl may carry it on for four more weeks after which a heathy baby born would be given up for adoption. Court was further told that the minor girl may suffer lifelong issues if the pregnancy is terminated now and would not be able to bear children in the future.

"A minor child, a rape victim, there should be no impediment to force her to have her child...you are coming out with absolutely clean prayers, you have done your duty, we know your pain but she will face this trauma for her whole life..", CJI Kant said in response. This is all medical science. Please know what the reality is today, will the child be able to bear the designation of a mother, the CJI added.

"You have rushed to court, rather than giving citizens the respect to choose..what is your parens patriae approach..please do that and don't press your curative madam..," Justice Bagchi added.

Dr. Ramesh Aggarwal from AIIMS, also present personally before the bench tried to persuade it. "We are visualising that there is termination of pregnancy, but this baby would for sure survive..this baby would then be in NICU for 6-12 months..we terminated a pregnancy and now the baby for last one year is in NICU..the child is with state now..the second life is very much there, surviving with disability, it is an abandoned child with no family support..", he told the bench.

On Friday, while allowing the15-year-old girl's plea to terminate her unwanted pregnancy, court had noted that asking the minor to continue with her unwanted pregnancy will be an affront to her right to live with dignity and reproductive autonomy, while rendering her “subordinate” to the child yet to be born.

A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had allowed the minor, who had been admitted at AIIMS Delhi since April 10, to undergo medical termination, while making it clear that “no court ought to compel any woman, and more so a minor child, to carry a pregnancy to full term against her express will.”

“If the pregnant woman carrying an unwanted pregnancy is compelled to continue such a pregnancy, then the constitutional rights of the pregnant woman would be breached,” noted the court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing before court, had told the bench that the child could be given up for adoption through CARA post being born. He told the bench that as per medical reports, termination of pregnancy at this stage may be risky for both the mother and the unborn child.

“Can the constitutional court say that since the statutory remedy is not available, no constitutional remedy would also be available? That cannot be the approach,” the court said adding that such an interpretation would drive women towards unsafe and illegal abortion centres. Justice Nagarathna further warned that denying relief in such circumstances could expose women, especially minors, to grave risks, including resort to unregulated procedures that may cause irreversible harm.

The court also underscored minor’s psychological distress, including reported attempts to take her own life, observing that forcing continuation of the pregnancy would have “long-lasting repercussions” on her mental health, education, social standing, and overall development. “We cannot compel a lady to undergo pregnancy. It will be against her bodily autonomy and liberty,” remarked the court, even as Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati flagged concerns over the risks involved at an advanced stage of pregnancy and the state’s willingness to take care of the girl and the child if she completed the full term.

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi

Hearing Date: April 30, 2026