Medical Boards Formed Under MTP Act Must Provide Complete, Cogent & Clear Opinion On Termination Of Pregnancy: MP High Court

Noting that opinions of medical boards on termination of pregnancy did not contain complete information in several cases, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed that the board formed under Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act must provide "complete, cogent and clear opinions" on MTP cases.

The High Court made these observations in a suo moto petition initiated after it took cognizance of a letter sent to the Principal Registrar (Judicial). The court also observed that the references under MTP Act were made to the high court in a "very casual manner" noting that "each and every" MTP case was being referred to the high court.

It further said that where pregnancy does not exceed 24 weeks trial court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on termination based on the consent of the guardian or the pregnant woman while considering the registered medical practitioner's opinion; thus "such cases are not required to be referred to this Court for termination of pregnancy". 

On the lack of information in medical board's opinion, Justice Vishal Mishra in his order observed:

"It is also seen that the opinions of the medical board placed before this Court for consideration are not giving complete information as required under the MTP Act. There should be specific observations and clear opinion in terms of the requirements under Section 3 of the MTP Act to the effect that (i) the opinion formed is in good faith (ii) the continuance of the pregnancy would involve a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health and (iii) there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from any serious physical or mental abnormality. Generally the reports which are sent to this Court for perusal are silent about the aforesaid". 

The court thus directed:

"Under these circumstances, the Medical Board duly constituted in terms of Section 3 of the MTP Act is directed to provide complete, cogent and clear opinions with respect to the cases falling under the MTP Act, 1971...The Registrar General of this Court is directed to circulate the copy of this order to all the Principal District & Sessions Judges of the State and the State Medical Board for doing the needful".

The prosecutrix, aged 17 years, was sexually assaulted and raped by the accused. During her medical examination, she was found to be 28 weeks pregnant with mild anaemia. 

However, the trial court, while referring the matter to the High Court, stated, "The victim and her mother present expressed that she does not want to have an abortion and the victim expressed that she has married the accused and she wants to release the accused from jail". 

The bench observed that the prosecutrix and her mother did not consent to the termination; nevertheless, the trial court referred the matter to the High Court.

Thus, the bench held, "The consent of a pregnant woman in decisions of reproductive autonomy and termination of pregnancy is paramount. Once there is no consent, no order regarding termination of pregnancy can be passed". 

The high court further referred to Section 3(4) of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act which states "...(a) No pregnancy of a woman, who has not attained the age of eighteen years, or, who, having attained the age of eighteen years, is a lunatic, shall be terminated except with the consent in writing of her guardian. (b) Save as otherwise provided in C1.(a), no pregnancy shall be terminated except with the consent of the pregnant woman". 

In the present case, it was observed that the prosecutrix had not given her consent for the termination of pregnancy and wished to continue the pregnancy and thus the sessions court should not have referred the matter to high court for consideration of MTP. 

"The age of prosecutrix to be 17 years and the medical report dated 22.08.2025 shows that she was carrying pregnancy of more than 28 weeks; however, she wants to continue the pregnancy, therefore, there was no occasion for the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Amarpatan District Satna (M.P.) to have referred the matter to this Court for passing an order with respect to termination of pregnancy," the high court said. 

The plea was disposed of. 

Case Title: Prosecutrix X v State of Madhya Pradesh (WP-34145-2025)

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 186

For State: Government Advocate Alok Agnihotri

Click here to read/download the Order