- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 25408 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. Ms X (THOUGH THE NAME OF THE VICTIM'S MOTHER IS MENTIONEDIN THE CAUSE TITLE OF THE PETITION, IN LIGHT OF THE DIRECTIONS OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF BHUPINDER SHARMA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH REPORTED IN (2003) 8 SCC 551, THE NAME OF THE VICTIM 'S MOTHER NOT DISCLOSED) …PETITIONER (BY Smt. DEEPIKA HUNGENAHALLY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDAH AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU 560001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER ANAVATTI PS SORABA CIRCLE SHIVAMOGGA - 577413. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 3. DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY BENGALURU DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX SHIVAMOGGA 577201 REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY. 4. MCGANN TEACHING DISTRICT HOSPITAL SHIVAMOGGA INSITITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES MISSION COMPOUND SHIVAMOGGA KARNATAKA - 577201 REPRESENTED BY ITS MEDICAL SUPERINTENDED AND CHAIRMAN. 5. CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT SHIVAMOGGA KARNATAKA - 577204. REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRPERSON. 6. DISTRICT CHILDREN PROTECTION UNIT SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT 100FT ROAD ALKOLA SHIVAMOGGA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT CHILD PROTECTION OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.PRATHIMA HONNAPURA., AAG A/W SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP FOR R1, R2, R4, R5 AND R6; SMT. B.V. VIDYULATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R3) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO. 4 TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO TERMINATE THE PREGNANCY OF THE PETITIONERS DAUGHTER; B. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO. 4 TO PRESERVE THE TERMINATED FOETUS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DNA TESTING AND ANALYSIS; C. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO. 2 TO CONDUCT DNA TEST OF THE TERMINATED FOETUS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION IN CRIME NO. 0921 OF 2024 REGISTERED BEFORE RESPONDENT NO. 2 i.e., ANAVATTI PS; D. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND RESPONDENT NO. 4 TO MEET THE ENTIRE EXPENSE OF THE PETITIONER TOWARDS MEDICAL EXPENSES, COUNSELLING AND OTHER TREATMENT SHE MIGHT HAVE TO UNDERGO; E. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO DISBURSE A SUM OF RS. 3,00,000/- (RUPEES THREE LAKH ONLY) TOWARDS COMPENSATION AS PER THE COMPENSATION SCHEME FOR WOMEN VICTIMS/SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT/OTHER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner, a minor is represented by her mother, and she is a victim of sexual assault with the investigation still underway. The petitioner, who is twenty-four weeks and four days into pregnancy as of this date, seeks direction to the fourth respondent to ensure that her pregnancy is medically terminated with further direction to the second respondent [the Station House Officer] to ensure that foetus in the womb is subjected to the DNA Test as part of investigation in Crime No.91/2024. 2. This Court has called for a report from the Medical Board with the participation of the Member Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority [DLSA]. The Medical Board has filed its report after engagement with the petitioner and her mother, and the Board's opinion is that the petitioner has no emotional attachment to the foetus and that the petitioner's pregnancy could be terminated observing - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 that there will be risks even if the pregnancy is continued to the term. The Member Secretary, District Legal Services Authority has forwarded a Special Note, and it transpires from this Note that the petitioner [and her mother as well] is keen on termination of the pregnancy also because of the consequences that could be if the word gets around that she is in the family way despite being a victim. 3. As of the date of the petition, the petitioner may have just completed 24 weeks of pregnancy, and Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 carves out an exception inter alia for minors who are victims of rape for termination of pregnancy beyond twenty weeks but when the decision is for the reasons contemplated under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and is based on opinion of medical practitioners in good faith that continuing the pregnancy could - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 involve a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health. 4. 4. On the permissibility in law of medical termination of pregnancy beyond twenty-four weeks in case of minors when the Medical Board opines in favour of termination, this Court, without dilation, must refer to the recent decision of the High Court of Gujarat in XYZ v. State of Gujarat and another1. The High Court of Gujarat, to underscore the right of a woman [even a minor] to make a reproductive choice and the importance of mental health of the victim while deciding on the request by a minor rape victim for medical termination when into pregnancy beyond twenty-four weeks, has referred to the decisions of the Apex Court in [i] X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, 1 2024 SCC OnLine Guj 4042 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 Government of NCT of Delhi2, (2023) 9 SCC 433, and [ii] A Mother of X v. The State of Maharashtra3. 5. In the present case, the Medical Board's assessment is that the petitioner, as of 22.08.2025, is twenty-four weeks and four days into pregnancy, and the Board’s opinion is that termination could be allowed because there would be risks even if the pregnancy is continued to term and that the petitioner is keen on termination because it could affect her education and future. The Board’s opinion, as also the Special note by the DLSA, establishes that the petitioner proposes to exercise her right to make a reproductive choice in seeking medical termination of her pregnancy. 6. This Court opines that the petitioner should not be denied this right only because she has exercised that right just a few days closer to the 2 (2023) 9 SCC 433 3 In Civil Appeal No. 5194 of 2024 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 completion of 24 weeks of pregnancy, crucially when the medical opinion is that she will not be exposed to imminent peril and the risk will remain even if the petitioner carries the pregnancy to the term. The petitioner is a minor and she asserts that she is a victim of sexual assault. Further, this Court opines that the second respondent given that the investigation is pending and that the victim should not be prejudiced because of the termination, must ensure that the proper procedure is followed for the DNA test of the foetus for investigation. Hence the following: ORDER [a] The petition is allowed. [b] The fourth respondent is directed to ensure that the victim's pregnancy is terminated under all due care and diligence. [c] The second respondent is directed to take all such further measures as would be - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32855 WP No. 25408 of 2025 necessary to ensure that there is a DNA test for investigation. [d] The fifth respondent is directed to render all assistance to the petitioner even post- termination so that her health is not put to peril. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV