1 2025:CGHC:40113 AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4245 of 2025 XYZ ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Affairs (Police) Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 -The Superintendent Of Police, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Station House Officer, Police Station, Saraswatinagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Medical And Health Officer, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Anjali Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11.08.2025 1. A minor victim of forcible sexual intercourse/rape by accused in Crime No.164/2025 registered at PS - Saraswatinagar, District Raipur (C.G.) has filed this writ petition through her natural guardian with following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to 2 issue an appropriate writ, thereby granting permission in favour of petitioner to terminate her pregnancy carrying by the petitioner on account of rape committed with her against her will. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent authorities to depute registered medical practitioner to cause termination of petitioner's pregnancy. 10.3 That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner is a victim of forcible sexual intercourse committed with her by the accused of Crime No.164/2025 registered at Police Station -Saraswatinagar, Raipur, District-Raipur, (CG. As a result of the said forcible sexual intercourse, the petitioner/victim is carrying pregnancy which she wants to abort, as the said pregnancy is causing her anguish and she does not want to have a child born out of a person, who has ravished her without her consent and has subjected her to humility and embarrassment before the society. Petitioner being minor if for any reason has to deliver a child it will cause adverse impact on her mind and therefore, this petition is filed seeking permission of this Court for termination of pregnancy. 3. When the case came up for hearing before this Court on 08.08.2025 this Court directed the Civil Surgeon, District Hospital, Raipur to examine the petitioner and submit the examination report. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, petitioner was examined by the team of doctors and as per the report dated 09.08.2025 submitted 3 before this Court by the doctors of the concerned Hospital, age of the pregnancy of petitioner is about 32-34 weeks and doctors have opined that termination of pregnancy will cause more risk as compared to spontaneous labour and denied for termination of pregnancy. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State Counsel perused the documents available in record. 5. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and the Rules framed thereunder governs termination of pregnancy. Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act spells out the situations wherein pregnancies may be terminated by registered medical practitioners. Section 3 of the MTP Act provides that when the length of pregnancy is within 20 weeks it may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner if an opinion is reached in good faith that continuance of the same would involve a risk to the life of the pregnant women or cause grave injury to her physical or mental health or there is a risk to the child or that it will suffer from abnormalities. Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “MTP Act”) reads as under:- “3. When pregnancies may be terminated by registered medical practitioners.—(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), a registered medical practitioner shall not be guilty of any offence under that Code or under any other law for the time being in force, if any pregnancy is terminated by him in accordance with the provisions of this Act. [(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), a pregnancy may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner,— 4 (a) where the length of the pregnancy does not exceed twenty weeks, if such medical practitioner is, or (b) where the length of the pregnancy exceeds twenty weeks but does not exceed twenty-four weeks in case of such category of woman as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act, if not less than two registered medical practitioners are, of the opinion, formed in good faith, that— (i) 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; or (ii) there is a substantial risk that if the child were born, it would suffer from any serious physical or mental abnormality. Explanation 1.—For the purposes of clause (a), where any pregnancy occurs as a result of failure of any device or method used by any woman or her partner for the purpose of limiting the number of children or preventing pregnancy, the anguish caused by such pregnancy may be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. Explanation 2.—For the purposes of clauses (a) and (b), where any pregnancy is alleged by the pregnant woman to have been caused by rape, the anguish caused by the pregnancy shall be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. (2-A) The norms for the registered medical practitioner whose opinion is required for termination of pregnancy at different gestational age shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made under this Act. (2-B) The provisions of sub-section (2) relating to the length of the pregnancy shall not apply to the termination of pregnancy by the medical practitioner where such termination is necessitated by the diagnosis of any of the substantial foetal abnormalities diagnosed by a Medical Board. (2-C) Every State Government or Union territory, as the case may be, shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute a Board to be called a Medical Board for the purposes of this Act to exercise such powers and functions as may be prescribed by rules made under this 5 Act. (2-D) The Medical Board shall consist of the following, namely — (a) a Gynecologist; (b) a Paediatrician; (c) a Radiologist or Sonologist; and (d) such other number of members as may be notified in the Official Gazette by the State Government or Union territory, as the case may be.] (3) In determining whether the continuance of pregnancy would involve such risk of injury to the health as is mentioned in sub- section (2), account may be taken of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment. (4) (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 [mentally ill person], shall be terminated except with the consent in writing of her guardian. (b) Save as otherwise provided in clause (a), no pregnancy shall be terminated except with the consent of the pregnant woman.” 6. In case of a pregnancy which exceeds 20 weeks but is within 24 weeks, the same may be terminated if an opinion on the same parameter is produced by two registered medical practitioners. The cases of such category of women is prescribed under Rule 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act. 7. It is also to be noted that under Section 3(2)(b) of the MTP Act, a pregnancy may be terminated even beyond 20 but not beyond 24 weeks where such termination of such pregnancy is necessary due to any substantial foetal abnormality as diagnosed by a medical board. Section 3(2)(b)(i) of the MTP Act reads as under:- "3.(2)(b)(i) the continuance of the pregnancy would involve 6 a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health;" 8. Furthermore, as per Section 5 of the MTP Act, termination of pregnancy of a duration exceeding 24 weeks can also be allowed only if an opinion is formed in good faith for the purpose of saving the life of the pregnant woman. Relevant portion of Section 5 of the MTP Act is quoted as under :- “5. Sections 3 and 4 when not to apply.—(1) The provisions of Section 4, and so much of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 3 as relate to the length of the pregnancy and the opinion of not less than two registered medical practitioners, shall not apply to the termination of a pregnancy by a registered medical practitioner in a case where he is of opinion, formed in good faith, that the termination of such pregnancy is immediately necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman. (2) X X X X (3) X X X X (4) X X X X” 9. The scheme of the Act has been explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of X vs. Union of India & Anr., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine 1338, which reads as under: “21. The position of law can therefore be summarized as follows : Length of the pregnancy Requirements for termination Up to twenty weeks Opinion of one RMP in terms of Section 3 (2) Between twenty and twenty-four weeks Opinion of two RMPs in terms of Section 3 (2) read with Rule 3B. 7 Beyond twenty four weeks If the termination is required to save the life of the pregnant woman, the opinion of one RMP in terms of Section 5 ____________________________ If there are substantial foetal abnormalities, with the approval of the Medical Board in terms of Section 3 (2B) read with Rule 3A (a) (i).” 10. From a perusal of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, as well as the Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in X vs. Union of India and Another, 2023 SCC OnLine 1338, it is amply clear that a pregnancy which is beyond 24 weeks can only be terminated if requirements provided under Section 5 of the MTP Act are satisfied and the decision has been made to save the life of the pregnant woman or to the satisfaction of Section 3(2)(b) and Section 3(2)(a)(i) for substantial foetal abnormalities. 11. Perusal of the examination report of the petitioner/victim submitted before this Court show that fetus is preterm compatible with life with no obvious congenital anomaly and termination of pregnancy at this gestational age may cause more risk as compared to spontaneous labour and denied for medical termination of pregnancy. Since the foetus is viable and normal and there is no danger to the petitioner to carry on with the pregnancy, foeticide would neither be ethical nor legally permissible. 12. Petitioner is already 32-34 weeks pregnant with a healthy and viable fetus. The prayer sought for by petitioner for a direction for medical 8 termination of pregnancy cannot be acceded to by this Court in view of the report dated 09.08.2025. 13. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, considering the fact that minor victim of rape has to deliver a child, State Government is directed to make all necessary arrangement and to bear all the expenses of hospitalization for delivery as and when victim is admitted. In the event, the minor and her parents desire to give the child in adoption after delivery, the State Government shall take all necessary steps in accordance with the applicable provisions of law to facilitate this exercise. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar VErma) Judge J.