Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

In a decisive ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has directed the immediate termination of pregnancy of a minor girl who was allegedly kidnapped and raped. The court allowed the medical termination after the petitioner, the father of the child submitted that “his daughter is pregnant and in case if her pregnancy is not medically terminated, then she is likely to suffer the mental agony and she is not fit to give birth to a child of a rapist.”

The court, presided over by Justice G.S. Ahluwalia, issued the order, emphasising the urgency and sensitivity of the case. The court instructed the Chief Medical and Health Officer (CMHO) of District Hospital, Singrauli, to admit the prosecutrix if she is brought by her father or mother. The court further directed “In case if CMHO, District Hospital, Singrauli feels that for better treatment the prosecutrix is required to be sent to any multispeciality hospital, then he can refer her to the said hospital for undergoing the medical termination of pregnancy.”

Represented by Advocate Aniruddh Prasad Shah, the petitioner alleged that his daughter had been missing, prompting the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) at Police Station Morwa, District Singrauli, for an offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Upon the recovery of the prosecutrix, additional charges were added under Sections 366, 376(3), 376(2)(n) of the IPC and Sections 5/6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The court took into consideration the affidavit filed by the father, reaffirming the allegations that the prosecutrix was kidnapped and raped by the accused, who was later arrested. The petitioner highlighted the need for the termination, as well as a report from the District Medical Board, Singrauli, which supported the medical termination of the pregnancy given the circumstances.

Moreover, the court directed the doctors to preserve the fetus without using formalin solution, adhering instead to the directives provided by the DNA Test Laboratory. The preserved fetus is to be handed over to the investigating agency immediately, which in turn must ensure the fetus reaches the DNA Fingerprint Laboratory within two days of its seizure.

The court also mandated the DNA Fingerprinting Unit to submit their report within one month from the date of receiving the fetus. Furthermore, the court ordered that the blood sample of the accused, who has already been arrested, be sent for comparison purposes.

In accordance with the precedent set by the High Court of Bombay in the case of ‘Shaikh Ayesha Khatoon vs. Union of India’ and Others (2018 SCC OnLine Bom 11), the court reiterated that the doctors performing the medical termination of pregnancy and the State Government shall not be held responsible for the procedure, which is to be conducted solely at the risk and cost of the parents of the prosecutrix.

With these directives, the petition was disposed of.

Deputy Advocate General Swapnil Ganguli represented the respondents.

 

Cause Title: Victim A v State of Madhya Pradesh [WP No. 14913 of 2024]