Minor Rape Survivor Allowed To Terminate 28-Week Pregnancy; Delhi HC Says No Court Can Force A Child To Give Birth

Justice Mini Pushkarna passed the order while allowing a writ petition filed by the minor through her father under Article 226 of the Constitution, after noting that the pregnancy had resulted from rape and that its continuation would inflict grave psychological trauma on the child.

Although the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 ordinarily permits termination only up to 24 weeks in specified cases, the Court held that constitutional courts can exercise their extraordinary jurisdiction in deserving cases where continuation of pregnancy would violate the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court relied heavily on the opinion of the Medical Board constituted at AIIMS, New Delhi, which examined the minor through obstetric, psychiatric and psychological evaluations. The Board concluded that continuation of the pregnancy was likely to have an adverse psychological impact on the victim and certified that she was medically fit to undergo the procedure.

Significantly, the Government of NCT of Delhi informed the Court that it had no objection to the medical termination in view of the AIIMS report.

Referring to a series of recent decisions of the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, Justice Datta observed that constitutional courts are empowered to permit termination of pregnancies beyond the statutory ceiling where exceptional circumstances exist, particularly in cases involving sexual assault.

The Court cited its earlier decision in Minor J Through Mother P v. State, where termination of a 26-week pregnancy of a rape survivor had been permitted, as well as the Supreme Court's rulings in Venkatalakshmi v. State of Karnataka, A (Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra, and X v. Health & Family Welfare Department. The Court also relied extensively on a recent Supreme Court order delivered in April 2026, which underscored that reproductive autonomy forms an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

Quoting from the apex court's observations, the High Court noted 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."

The Supreme Court had further observed that forcing a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy would negate her decisional autonomy and could inflict irreversible physical, emotional and psychological trauma. It had also cautioned that denying constitutional remedies merely because statutory remedies under the MTP Act are unavailable would be contrary to constitutional principles.

Accepting the petition, the High Court directed that the minor be admitted to AIIMS, New Delhi, where a team of competent doctors would carry out the medical termination in accordance with applicable medical protocols.

The Court further directed AIIMS to preserve the foetal tissue for DNA profiling to aid the pending criminal investigation into the alleged rape. Recognising that the pregnancy arose out of a criminal offence, the Court ordered the Delhi Government to bear all expenses relating to the termination procedure, hospitalisation and post-operative care.

The Court also addressed the eventuality of a live birth during the procedure. It directed that if the child is born alive, AIIMS and the State authorities must provide all necessary neonatal care, including incubator support. The Child Welfare Committee is to be immediately informed, and if the minor and her father remain unwilling to raise the child, adoption proceedings may be initiated in accordance with law.