1 / 8 2025:CGHC:60948 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 6403 of 2025 ABC (Minor) Through Natural Guardian XYZ ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Ministry Of Public Health And Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chairman District Medical Board Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chairman District Medical Board Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 4 - The Chief Medical Officer (C.M.O.) Medical Board Of District Hospital Surajpur District - Surajpur (C.G.) 5 - Head Officer Of Department Gynaecologist (H.O.D.) Gynaic District Hospital, Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) 6 - Station House Officer Police Station AJAK Surajpur, District - Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate For State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Panel Lawyer Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR SINHA Date: 2025.12.17 14:37:25 +0530 2 / 8 SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 15/12/2025 1. A minor victim of forcible sexual intercourse/rape has filed this writ petition through her natural guardian seeking following reliefs:- “i. To permit the petitioner to terminate her ongoing pregnancy through registered medical practitioners at any approved private or government center or Hospital. ii. To direct then State to form a panel of expert doctors either at the District Hospital Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) or any Government Medical Hospital Raipur as early as possible for termination of pregnancy of the petitioner. iii. To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is a minor in age, who is alleged to have been subjected to repeated sexual assaults. The incident did not come in light till petitioner revealed her pregnancy. Thereafter, complaint was made and based on the complaint, FIR was registered against accused person. 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 / 8 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that team of doctors examined petitioners and opined that termination of pregnancy is denied for the reasons recorded in report. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available in record. 5. When the case came up for hearing before this Court on 10.12.2025 this Court issued a direction to Medical Superintendent of Dr. Bhimrao Govt. Medical College, Raipur, to examine the petitioner by a team of experts and to submit examination report. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, petitioner was examined by the Committee of doctors on 12.12.2025, consisting of seven Members and as per the report submitted before this Court, there is high risk in termination of pregnancy at the gestational age (preterm 31 weeks) and the Committee denied MTP at this gestational age. 6. The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (for short “MTP Act”) and the Rules framed thereunder governs termination of pregnancy. Section 3 of the MTP Act spells out the situations wherein pregnancies may be terminated by registered medical practitioners which 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. 4 / 8 [(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), a pregnancy may be terminated by a registered medical practitioner,— (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, 5 / 8 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 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.” 7. In case of a pregnancy which exceeds 20 weeks but does not exceeds 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. 8. 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 6 / 8 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 a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health;" 9. 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” 10. 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 7 / 8 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. 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).” 11. From 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. 12. Perusal of the examination report of the petitioner/victim submitted before this Court show that there is high risk in termination of pregnancy at this gestational age (preterm 31 weeks) and termination of pregnancy at the gestational age may cause more risk. Operative part of report prepared by Committee of seven members is extracted below for ready reference: 8 / 8 “Termination of pregnancy in this condition will require preterm induction of labour and may require operative intervention (Preterm LSCS). Continuation of pregnancy will provide time for correction of anemia. There is high risk in termination of pregnancy at this gestational age (Preterm 31 weeks). There are chances of survival of preterm neonate with all future risks of prematurity. Committee denies MTP at this gestational age.” 13. Petitioner is already 31 weeks pregnant. The prayer sought for by petitioner for a direction for medical termination of pregnancy cannot be acceded to by this Court in view of the report of Committee of experts/doctors consisting of seven Members. 14. 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. 15. Registry is directed to make report of doctor as part of record of writ petition. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Praveen