Victim X vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Amit Seth, J

1.The instant writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed by minor prosecutrix, who has been victimized of rape and the direction has been sought for against the respondents to terminate pregnancy of the petitioner.

2.In compliance of order dated 24/11/2025, learned State counsel has produced communication dated 25/11/2025 issued by the Head of Department, Department of Gynaecology, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior indicating that on 25/11/2025 in compliance of the order passed by this Court, prosecutrix was examined by the Medical Board comprising of six medical experts, who on examination of prosecutrix have opined that with proper facilities, pregnancy of the petitioner can be terminated. The proceedings of the committee is also produced by the State counsel.

3.As per sonography report of the petitioner filed as Annexure P/2 on the date of her examination i.e. 31/10/2025, she was carrying foetus of approximately six weeks.

4.Supreme Court considering the right of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India has held that unmarried woman has right to decide in respect of the pregnancy.

5.Supreme Court in the case of X Vs. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. (2023) 9 SCC 433, after considering constitutional values animating the interpretation of MTP Act and the MTP rules dealt with the right to Reproductive Autonomy of the women and has held as under:-

"64. When interpreting a sub-clause or part of a statutory provision, the entire section should be read together with different sub-clauses being a part of an integral whole. [Balasinor Nagrik Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya, (1987) 1 SCC 606; Madanlal Fakirchand Dudhediya v. Shree Changdeo Sugar Mills Ltd., 1962 SCC OnLine SC 65 : 1962 Supp (3) SCR 973 : AIR 1962 SC 1543] In terms of Section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act, not less than two RMPs must, in good faith, be of the opinion that the continuation of the pregnancy of any woman who falls within the ambit of Rule 3-B would involve : (i) a risk to her life; (ii) grave injury to her physical health; or

(iii) grave injury to her mental health. Alternatively, not less than two RMPs must, in good faith, be of the opinion that there is a substantial risk of the child suffering from a serious physical or mental abnormality, if born. Women who seek to avail of the benefit under Rule 3- B of the MTP Rules continue to be subject to the requirements of Section 3 (2) of the MTP Act.

One of the grounds on the basis of which termination of pregnancy may be carried out is when the continuance of a pregnancy would involve risk of injury to the mental health of the woman. The expression “grave injury to her physical or mental health” used in Section 3(2) is used in an overarching and all-encompassing sense. The two Explanations appended to Section 3(2) provide the circumstances under which the anguish caused by a pregnancy may be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of a woman. 66. Courts in the country have permitted women to terminate their pregnancies where the length of the pregnancy exceeded twenty weeks (the outer limit for the termination of the pregnancy in the unamended MTP Act) by expansively interpreting Section 5, which permitted RMPs to terminate pregnancies beyond the twenty- week limit when it was necessary to save the life of the woman. In X v. Union of India [X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458] , Mamta Verma v. Union of India [Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289] , Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India [Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462] , Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India [Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India (2018) 13 SCC 339] , this Court permitted the termination of post twentyweek pregnancies after taking into account the risk of grave injury to the mental health of a pregnant woman by carrying the pregnancy to term.

The grounds for approaching courts differ and include various reasons such as a change in the circumstances of a woman's environment during an ongoing pregnancy, including risk to life, [A v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 75; X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458; Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462; Tapasya Umesh Pisal v. Union of India, (2018) 12 SCC 57; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289] risk to mental health, [X v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 458; Meera Santosh Pal v. Union of India, (2017) 3 SCC 462; Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289; Z v. State of Bihar, (2018) 11 SCC 572 : (2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 675] discovery of foetal anomalies, [A v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 5; Sarmishtha Chakrabortty v. Union of India, (2018) 13 SCC 339; Tapasya Umesh Pisal v. Union of India, (2018) 12 SCC 57; Mamta Verma v. Union of India, (2018) 14 SCC 289] late discovery of pregnancy in case of minors and women with disabilities, [X v. Union of India, (2020) 19 SCC 806] and pregnancies resulting from sexual assault or rape. [Z v. State of Bihar, (2018) 11 SCC 572 : (2018) 2 SCC (Cri) 675; X v. Union of India, (2020) 19 SCC 806] These are illustrative situations thrown up by cases which travel to the court. Although the rulings in these cases recognised grave physical and mental health harms and the violation of the rights of women caused by the denial of the option to terminate unwanted pregnancies, the relief provided to the individual petitioner significantly varied.

The expression “mental health” has a wide connotation and means much more than the absence of a mental impairment or a mental illness. The World Health Organisation defines “mental health” as a state of “mental well-being that enables people to cope with the stresses of life, realise their abilities, learn well and work well, and contribute to their community”. [ World Health Organisation, “Promoting Mental Health : Concepts, Emerging Evidence, Practice (Summary Report)” (2004).] The determination of the status of one's mental health is located in one's self and experiences within one's environment and social context. Our understanding of the term “mental health” cannot be confined to medical terms or medical language, but should be understood in common parlance. The MTP Act itself recognises the need to look at the surrounding environment of the woman when interpreting injury to her health. Section 3(3) states that while interpreting “grave injury to her physical or mental health”, account may be taken of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment. The consideration of a woman's “actual or reasonably foreseeable environment” becomes pertinent, especially when determining the risk of injury to the mental health of a woman.

x x x x x xx x x x

The right to dignity encapsulates the right of every individual to be treated as a self-governing entity having intrinsic value. It means that every human being possesses dignity merely by being a human, and can make self-defining and self-determining choices. Dignity has been recognised as a core component of the right to life and liberty under Article 21. 116. If women with unwanted pregnancies are forced to carry their pregnancies to term, the State would be stripping them of the right to determine the immediate and long-term path their lives would take. Depriving women of autonomy not only over their bodies but also over their lives would be an affront to their dignity. The right to choose for oneself — be it as significant as choosing the course of one's life or as mundane as one's day-to-day activities — forms a part of the right to dignity. It is this right which would be under attack if women were forced to continue with unwanted pregnancies.

x x x x x x x x x x

In the context of abortion, the right to dignity entails recognizing the competence and authority of every woman to take reproductive decisions, including the decision to terminate the pregnancy. Although human dignity inheres in every individual, it is susceptible to violation by external conditions and treatment imposed by the State. The right of every woman to make reproductive choices without undue interference from the State is central to the idea of human dignity. Deprivation of access to reproductive healthcare or emotional and physical well-being also injures the dignity of women."

6.In view of the above, the petition is allowed. This Court permits the termination of pregnancy subject to the following conditions:-

(i) Since the petitioner is already examined at Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, the concerned Dean is directed to get the medical termination of pregnancy of the petitioner performed by following the protocols as prescribed. Prosecutrix along with her guardian shall appear before the Dean tomorrow.

(ii) The procedure of termination of pregnancy will be carried out in the presence of the expert team of doctors. The expert doctors will explain to the family members as well as the petitioner the risk of getting the termination of her pregnancy and also other factors.

(iii) Every care and caution will be taken by the doctors while terminating the pregnancy. All medical attention and other medical facilities including that of a presence of a Pediatrician as well as a Radiologist and other required doctors will be made available to her.

(iv) The post operative care up to the extent required, will be extended to the petitioner. It will be the duty of the State Government to take care of the child, if born alive.

(v) The doctors will also ensure that a sample from the foetus is protected for DNA examination and as and when required will be handed over to the prosecution for using in the criminal case itself.

(vi) A specialized team of Doctors shall take a decision as to when to terminate the pregnancy. All necessary care and caution shall be taken by the Doctors while carrying out the procedure for termination of the pregnancy.

7.The typed copy of this order be supplied to the learned counsel appearing for the State for further communication to the Dean and necessary compliance.

Certified copy today.