X Y ZversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ANR

2026:BHC-AUG:16750-DB
                                               1                         951WP3972.2026.odt


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               951 WRIT PETITION NO. 3972 OF 2026

                                                   XYZ
                                                VERSUS
                       The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Anr
                                                   ...
               Mr. Murlidhar S. Karad - Advocate for the Petitioner
               Mr. V. M. Kagne - AGP for the State
                                                   ...

                                         CORAM :      SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI
                                                              AND
                                                      NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

                                         DATED :      18TH APRIL, 2026

               PER COURT : -

               1.           The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the

               Constitution of India by a minor through her guardian mother for

               termination of pregnancy through the registered medical practitioner.




               2.           The petitioner, who is stated to be 17 years and 7 months

               old, has filed the present petition stating that she is a victim of sexual

               assault. Her date of birth is 22.09.2008. It is alleged that, an accused by

               misrepresenting her had committed rape on her and thereby she became

               pregnant. An FIR came to be lodged vide C.R. No. 0208 of 2026 with the

               CIDCO Police Station, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offences

               punishable under Sections 12, 4, and 8 of the Protection of Children

               from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and Sections 64 and 88 of the
                              2                        951WP3972.2026.odt

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The fact of pregnancy and the lodging

of the report are at a belated stage. When she was medically examined

on 09.04.2026 at GHATI Hospital, it was informed that she was

pregnant with a gestational age of 26 weeks and 1 day. It is submitted

on behalf of the petitioner that she has no intention of carrying the

pregnancy further and seeks to terminate the same.




3.          After hearing the learned Advocate for the petitioner, by our

order dated 16.04.2026, we had directed Respondent No. 2 – Dean to

formulate Medical Board and get the Petitioner examined. A report was

to be submitted today. Accordingly, the report has been submitted.

Respondent No. 2 appointed five (5) medical officers from different

departments to examine the petitioner. The report of the USG obstetric

anomaly scan provides the findings that as USG scan done on

17.04.2026 s/o SLIUG of 27 weeks with none obvious congenital

anomaly seen at present scan. The opinion of the Medical Board is in

favour of the termination of pregnancy and the gestation for the

decision has been given.    As per the psychiatrist’s opinion, medical

termination of pregnancy should be considered in view of the

psychological circumstances, and all committee members agree with the

said opinion. The opinion is with a rider that as the pregnancy has

advanced to a gestational age of 27 weeks (estimated fetal weight of

1023 gms), the baby likely to born will be alive hence the method for
                                3                        951WP3972.2026.odt

termination will involve intra-cardiac KCL injection and induction of

intrauterine fetal demise so that the baby born will be non-viable after

birth, and the risk involved in intervention like surgical intervention,

blood transfusion will be as per procedure.



4.           In the present case, we would like to take help of the

observations from the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No. 12194

of 2025 (XYZ Verus The State of Maharash Through Secretary and

Another) decided on 7th October, 2025. In the said case, we had taken

note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suchita srivastava

Vs. Chandigarh Administration; (2009) 9 SCC 1, as well as A (Mother of

X) Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another; (2024) 5 SCR 470. In the

order dated 7th October, 2025, passed by this Court in which Hon’ble

Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi was a member of the Bench, it was

observed that, it is necessary to restate the constitutional guarantees

that govern such cases. The Constitution of India, through Article 14, 19

and 21 guarantees every individual the right to live with dignity,

autonomy and bodily integrity. For women, and particularly for women

who are victims of sexual assault, these rights are not abstract ideals but

they are living assurances that the law will not compound their trauma.

Certain directions were then issued in A (Mother of X) (supra) as to

what precautions this Court is required to undertake and, therefore,

certainly those safeguards laid down therein would be followed.
                                4                        951WP3972.2026.odt




5.           In addition, we would observe that, in cases involving

victims of sexual offences, they cannot be compelled to carry the

pregnancy till delivery, as it would cause a mental scar and trauma to

them. Of course, in the case of a minor girl, motherhood cannot be

thrust upon her against her wishes.       It will not be out of place to

mention here that, in Writ Petition No. 12194 of 2025, taking into

consideration the fact that the victim therein was a 35-year-old lady, this

Court had refused to grant permission for termination at an advanced

stage of gestation. However, having regard to the age of the petitioner in

the present case, the circumstances of sexual assault, and the medical

opinion, this Court is inclined to grant permission for termination of

pregnancy. We would also like to take the support of the decision in

Writ Petition No. 15621 of 2025 (X.Y.Z. v. The State of Maharashtra,

through Secretary and Another), decided on 24 th December 2025,

wherein this Court considered Section 3 of the Medical Termination of

Pregnancy Act, 1971, Rule 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy

Rules, 2003, and Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and

allowed the Petitioner therein to terminate the pregnancy.



6.           In the case at hand, in the report submitted today, it has

been stated that, “the Radiology Department at Government Medical

College, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, does not have the facility for
                                                                 5                        951WP3972.2026.odt

                             intra-cardiac KCL injection as per the HOD radiologist’s opinion. Hence,

                             the pregnancy should be terminated at an institute where intra-cardiac

                             KCL injection facility is available. Upon query, the learned AGP submits

                             that, the said facility is available at JJ Hospital, Mumbai. Under such

                             circumstances, we pass the following order: -

                                                                     ORDER

                                      [i]     The Writ Petition is allowed.

                                      [ii]    The Petitioner is permitted to terminate her pregnancy at
                                              JJ Hospital, Mumbai, under the proper medical supervision,
                                              within a period three (3) days or any other earliest day, as
                                              per the medical advice.

                                      [iii]   As the criminal case registered by the Petitioner is under
                                              investigation and would be put to trial, we direct the
                                              Medical Officer/s to preserve the evidence for subsequent
                                              DNA test report by drawing tissues from the foetus in order
                                              to use it as a piece of evidence in the ensuing trial to be
                                              prosecuted by the Petitioner. It is needless to observe that
                                              in the event tissues are drawn for the purpose of DNA test
                                              the same shall be handed over to the investigating agency
                                              by the concerned hospital.

                                      [iv]    Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.




                                  [NEERAJ P. DHOTE]                           [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI]
                                       JUDGE                                           JUDGE

                             SG Punde



Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 18/04/2026 17:16:51