Logo
Court Book - India Code App - Play Store

Court Upholds Minor's Right to Continue Pregnancy Despite Mother's Opposition

23 Jun 2025 10:18 PM - By Shivam Y.

Court Upholds Minor's Right to Continue Pregnancy Despite Mother's Opposition

The Rajasthan High Court recently delivered a significant judgment in X v The State of Rajasthan & Ors., dismissing a petition filed by a mother seeking termination of her minor daughter’s pregnancy. The court upheld the minor’s right to retain her pregnancy, emphasizing her autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Background

The petitioner, mother of a 17-year-old girl, alleged her daughter was raped by an accused, Dinesh Kumar, resulting in pregnancy. She argued her minor daughter lacked the capacity to make informed decisions about her health and sought termination under Sections 3 and 5 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971. However, the minor, through her consent memo, explicitly refused abortion and expressed willingness to raise the child.

Read Also:- Kerala High Court: Police Cannot Enter History-Sheeters’ Homes at Night in the Name of Surveillance

Key Contentions

  • The petitioner claimed the pregnancy posed risks to the minor’s physical and mental health, citing her low hemoglobin levels.
  • The State countered that the minor had eloped voluntarily and the pregnancy resulted from consensual intercourse. Medical reports confirmed the pregnancy was 22 weeks old, beyond the safe abortion window, and the minor was physically fit to continue it.

Justice Chandra Prakash Shrimali noted the minor’s maturity, stating:

“Though the daughter is minor, she is sufficiently mature to understand the consequences of her decision. Ignoring her consent would amount to forcible termination, causing grave trauma.”

Read also:- Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Frivolous Challenges to Competitive Exam Answer Keys, Upholds Expert Committee Authority

The court referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Suchita Srivastava v Chandigarh Administration, which affirmed reproductive choice as a facet of Article 21. It clarified that while the MTP Act permits guardian consent for minors, the minor’s willingness remains paramount in cases of divergent views.

The court dismissed the petition, directing the State to:

  1. Cover all medical expenses for the minor’s delivery.
  2. Provide compensation under the Rajasthan Victim Compensation Scheme, 2011.

Title: X v The State of Rajasthan & Ors.