'Personal Choice Must Be Respected': Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Minor Rape Survivor To Terminate 21-Week Pregnancy

Referring to the Supreme Court's dictum in Suchita Srivastava and Another v Chandigarh Administration (2009), where the Court applied the “best interests” theory which requires the Court to ascertain the course of action which would serve the best interests of the person in question, Justice Parth Prateem Sahu held,

“…there is no dispute that petitioner is victim of forcible sexual intercourse/rape. She is desirous of terminating pregnancy as she does not want to give birth to the child of a rapist. It is her personal choice to terminate pregnancy which the Court must respect as it is a facet of her personal liberty as has been held by the Supreme Court in case of Suchita Srivastava (supra). Continuation of pregnancy can gravely endanger her physical and mental health.”

Noting that the personal liberty of the petitioner has to be respected and it may be even more dangerous to the unborn child because “the society would not take the petitioner and her child properly and respectfully”, the Court further noted:

“…permitting rape victim in the present case to go in for medical termination of unwanted pregnancy would amount to compelling her to continue to bear such pregnancy for full duration and deliver the child, which would be violative of her bodily integrity, it would not only aggravate her mental trauma but would also have devastating effect on her overall health including on psychological and mental aspects. This is violative of her personal liberty, to borrow the words of the Supreme Court in Suchita Srivastava (supra), because “a woman's right to make reproductive choices is also a dimension of "personal liberty" as understood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India”.

Background

The petitioner had filed a writ petition seeking direction of the Court to facilitate the termination of her unwanted pregnancy. The Court had earlier directed the concerned Chief Medical Health Officer to conduct a medical examination on whether such termination can be carried out. As the petitioner's gestation age was 21 weeks and 1 day, the doctors suggested that medical termination can be performed.

The Court referred to Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which permits pregnancy termination by a registered medical practitioner if it does not exceed 24 weeks — (i) if the continuance of pregnancy would involve risk to life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health, or (ii) if there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped. Reference was further made to Explanation 1 which stipulates that— where any pregnancy is alleged by the pregnant woman to have been caused by rape, the anguish caused by such pregnancy shall be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman.

In this backdrop, the Court observed,

“Report of medical practitioners of District Hospital, Bilaspur, who medically examined the petitioner, would show that she is physically and mentally fit to undergo termination of pregnancy, which is of 21 weeks & 01 days i.e. within the outer limit of 24 weeks prescribed in Section 3 of the Act of 1971 for termination of pregnancy.”

Allowing the petition, the Court permitted the petitioner to approach Chief Medical Health Officer, who shall ensure that the petitioner's pregnancy is terminated after completing all requisite formalities.

Case Details:

Case Number: WPC No. 6057 of 2025

Case Title: A v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Order