Bombay High Court
XYZ THROU.HER GUARDIAN NASIMA ABDUL KALAM ANASARIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THORU. THE GOVT PLEADER AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court allowed the petition, directing the termination of the pregnancy and ordering the State to bear related expenses and compensation.
Summary
The petitioner, a 17‑year‑old survivor of sexual assault, sought a medical termination of her pregnancy after her mother’s death, residing with her aunt. An FIR was lodged under Sections 64(1) and 64(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. A Medical Board, constituted under Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, examined her and reported a gestation of about 25 weeks with no fetal anomalies, concluding that termination beyond 24 weeks was beyond the Board’s purview but the survivor was fit for the procedure. The Court, emphasizing the survivor’s constitutional rights to reproductive freedom, privacy, dignity and bodily autonomy, allowed the petition and directed the Dean of Sir J.J. Hospital to perform intra‑uterine foeticide, ordering the State to bear hospital expenses and provide compensation under the Manodhairya Scheme. The petition was consequently disposed in the petitioner’s favour.
Issues considered
- Whether a minor survivor of sexual assault who is pregnant beyond the 24‑week limit under the MTP Act can be granted a medical termination of pregnancy.
- Whether the constitutional rights to reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy override the gestational limit in the MTP Act in such circumstances.
- Whether the State is liable to bear the costs of the termination procedure and provide compensation under the Manodhairya Scheme.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 64(1), 64(2)
- Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 — s. 3
- Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4
Subjects
- termination of pregnancy
- reproductive rights
- minor
- sexual assault
- MTP Act
- constitutional privacy
- bodily autonomy
- state liability
- Manodhairya Scheme
Judgment
Digitally 28-WP-6587-2026 - MTP.doc
signed by
RUPALI
RUPALI RAJESH
RAJESH WAKODIKAR
WAKODIKAR Date:
2026.05.19 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
15:07:22
+0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6587 OF 2026
X Throu. Her Guardian
Nasima Abdul Kalam Ansari ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Throu.
The Govt. Pleader & Ors. ...Respondents
Mrs. Pranali Kakade for the Petitioner.
Smt. Pooja Patil, A.G.P for the Respondent-State.
Dr. Amrita Jain, Head of Unit, DBS-GYN, J.J.Hospital, Mumbai
CORAM : GAUTAM A. ANKHAD &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 18th MAY, 2026
(VACATION COURT)
P.C. :
1. The petition is filed by the survivor through her maternal aunt
for termination of pregnancy.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner survivor was
17 years, 1 month, 24 days as on the date of filing of the petition. The
Wakodikar 1/5
28-WP-6587-2026 - MTP.doc
biological mother of the survivor died on 15 th April, 2026. Thereafter, the
petitioner was residing with her maternal aunt. The petitioner was sexually
assaulted and therefore, the FIR was lodged by the petitioner at the behest
of the survivor bearing FIR No.394 of 2026 under Section 64(1) and 64(2)
(I) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w Section 4 of the Prevention of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. The matter was mentioned before us on 13 th May, 2026. We
had kept the matter on 14th May, 2026 and we had constituted a Medical
Board in terms of Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act,
1971 for medical examination of the victim.
4. The Board examined the survivor on 17 th May, 2026 and
submitted the report. The said report dated 18 th May, 2026 is taken on
record and marked ‘X’ for identification. The Medical Board, after
examining the survivor had opined that the survivor was fit for medical
termination of pregnancy. It opined that as the pregnancy has crossed 24
weeks and the foetus does not suffer from any congenital anomalies
permitting the medical termination of pregnancy was beyond the purview
Wakodikar 2/5
28-WP-6587-2026 - MTP.doc
of the Medical Board. They opined that the foetus was age about 25 weeks
and one day.
5. We had interacted with Dr. Amruta Jain, Heard of Unit, OBS-
GYN, J.J.Hospital, Mumbai, who was the Chairman of the Committee,
who was present through V.C. She informed us that the foetus is of about
25 weeks and that the petitioner / survivor is fit for medical termination of
pregnancy. She stated that the foetus does not suffer from any congenital
anomalies. We had also asked the survivor who was present before us on
V.C. as to whether she understood the consequences of her application in
this Court and whether she wanted the medical termination of pregnancy on
her own will or whether she was being pressurized by anybody else. The
survivor replied that she wanted the medical termination of pregnancy to be
done as per her own will and she had applied for medical termination of
pregnancy, without being coerced by any other person.
6. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner
as well as the learned A.G.P for the Respondent – State.
Wakodikar 3/5
28-WP-6587-2026 - MTP.doc
7. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, after
interacting with the survivor and after going through the report dated 18 th
May, 2026, we are of the confirmed opinion that the petition deserves to be
allowed.
8. We are conscious of the petitioner’s right to reproductive
freedom, her autonomy over the body, and her right to choice, privacy and
dignity, all of which are constitutionally protected. Medical Termination of
Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP) does not allow any interference with the
personal choice of pregnant woman in terms of proceeding with the
termination. The MTP Act leaves no scope for interference by the family or
the partner of the pregnant person in matters of reproductive choice.
9. In the Premises aforesaid, we direct the Dean of Sir
J.J.Hospital, Mumbai, to perform the intrauterine foeticide at Sir J.J.
Hospital, Mumbai after making all necessary arrangements.
10. The petitioner / survivor shall present herself before the
authorities of J.J.Hospital by 4.00 p.m. tomorrow i.e. on 19 th May, 2026,
Wakodikar 4/5
28-WP-6587-2026 - MTP.doc
after which, the Authorities of J. J. Hospital shall take steps to perform the
intrauterine foeticide, after making all necessary arrangements.
11. In case the foetus is born alive, the State Government to incur
all necessary expenses of the hospital, till the baby is discharged from the
hospital.
12. The State Government to provide necessary compensation
under the Manodhairya Scheme to the petitioner / survivor.
13. In this circumstances, the petition is allowed in terms of the
aforesaid directions.
14. Writ Petition No.6587 of 2026 stands disposed of accordingly.
SANDESH D. PATIL, J. GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
Wakodikar 5/5
Checking your session…