A long-pending writ petition filed by an unmarried woman seeking permission to terminate her pregnancy - and challenging parts of the abortion law - came to an end before the Bombay High Court on January 29, 2026. The Division Bench held that the legal issue raised by the petitioner no longer survives, in view of a binding judgment of the Supreme Court that has already settled the law.
The case was heard by Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande.
Read also:- Humiliation Is Not Justice: Allahabad High Court Strikes Down Placard Punishment for Student
Background of the Case
The petitioner, a 26-year-old unmarried woman from Maharashtra, approached the court in 2022 when her pregnancy had crossed 22 weeks. She sought two reliefs - permission to medically terminate the pregnancy and a declaration that Section 3(2)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, as amended in 2021, was unconstitutional to the extent it excluded unmarried women.
Her pregnancy, she told the court, was unintended and resulted from contraceptive failure. She expressed fear of social stigma, lack of family support, and serious mental distress if forced to continue the pregnancy.
At that time, the MTP Rules listed specific categories of women eligible for abortion between 20 and 24 weeks - such as rape survivors, minors, divorced or widowed women, and those facing medical emergencies. Unmarried women were not expressly named.
Interim Relief Granted Earlier
In August 2022, the High Court had allowed the petitioner to terminate her pregnancy after directing a medical examination by a specialist committee at Sir J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai. That part of the case was settled early on.
However, the constitutional challenge to the law itself remained pending, prompting notices to the State of Maharashtra and the Union of India.
While the petition was awaiting final hearing, the legal position underwent a decisive shift.
The Union of India pointed out that the Supreme Court of India had already examined the same issue in X vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, GNCTD. In that case, the apex court dealt with an almost identical situation - an unmarried woman seeking abortion beyond 20 weeks due to mental and social hardship.
The Supreme Court held that excluding unmarried women from the benefit of Rule 3-B of the MTP Rules would be discriminatory and contrary to Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
“The law should not decide the beneficiaries of a statute based on narrow patriarchal principles,” the Supreme Court had observed, affirming that reproductive autonomy and dignity apply equally to unmarried women.
High Court’s Observations
Referring extensively to the Supreme Court ruling, the Bombay High Court noted that subordinate legislation like the MTP Rules must be interpreted in harmony with the parent Act and constitutional values.
The bench observed that the apex court had already given a “purposive interpretation” to Rule 3-B, making it clear that unmarried women are also entitled to seek abortion up to 24 weeks when circumstances justify it.
“In our considered view, the issue raised in the petition is put to rest,” Justice Bharati Dangre remarked while dictating the oral judgment.
Direction to Authorities
During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel urged the court to ensure that women similarly placed are not forced to approach courts repeatedly for relief.
Taking note of this concern, the High Court reminded all authorities of their duty under Article 144 of the Constitution to follow Supreme Court judgments.
The bench specifically requested the Public Health Department of Maharashtra to circulate the Supreme Court’s ruling widely among hospitals and officials implementing the MTP Act.
Read also:- Supreme Court Clears Delay Hurdle in Land Compensation Appeals, Applies Limitation Act to
Final Decision
With the legal position now settled by the Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court disposed of the writ petition. The court held that no further adjudication on the constitutional validity of the provision was required.
The case thus concluded with reaffirmation that unmarried women cannot be denied access to abortion services solely due to their marital status.
Case Title: ABC vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 9782 of 2022
Decision Date: 29 January 2026
