The Allahabad High Court has directed a detailed inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the caesarean delivery of a baby after the Court had ordered medical termination of pregnancy in the case of a minor rape survivor.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad expressed serious concern over the manner in which its earlier direction was dealt with and directed the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to personally conduct an inquiry and submit a report within two weeks.
Background
The proceedings concerned a minor whose pregnancy had reached an advanced stage. The High Court had earlier considered her age, the circumstances in which the pregnancy occurred, her physical and psychological condition and her expressed wish not to continue the pregnancy.
The Medical Board had recorded the gestational age at approximately 29 weeks and two days. It found that the foetus had crossed the stage of viability and that both continuation and termination of the high-risk pregnancy carried medical risks. The report also recorded that the minor understood the nature and consequences of termination and had expressed that continuation of the pregnancy would cause further harm to her mental health.
On September 21, the High Court directed the Chief Medical Superintendent of S.R.N. Hospital, Prayagraj, to admit the minor and undertake termination of pregnancy on September 22 through the safest medically permissible procedure, with necessary safeguards and a specialist medical team. The State was also directed to bear the expenses relating to transportation, treatment and post-procedural care.
When the matter was taken up on September 23, the Court was informed that its September 21 direction had not been complied with in the manner contemplated.
The In-charge Head of the Department of Gynecology told the Bench that induction for termination through the vaginal passage was started on the evening of September 22. After the induction process failed, it was decided to deliver the baby through surgery. A caesarean delivery was consequently performed, following which the infant was admitted to the Children Hospital.
The doctor who performed the surgery, however, could not disclose under whose order or authorisation the caesarean delivery had been carried out. The In-charge Head of the Department also did not state that she had directed the procedure.
The Court further noted that the Head of the Department had been informed of the order but had left the station. The Bench also considered the circumstances in which the minor was admitted to the hospital and observed that, on the material placed before it, there appeared to have been no effective attempt during the morning of September 22 despite the Court's direction.
The Bench recorded that the doctors and other persons involved were prima facie found to have been deliberately negligent in complying with the Court's order.
The Court noted that no explanation had been offered regarding the circumstances in which the induction method failed. It also questioned why the Head of the Department had left the station without providing an explanation and why the doctor who performed the caesarean could not identify who had authorised the procedure.
The Court observed:
“It is a fit case where appropriate proceedings may be directed to be drawn against all of them for having played with the life of a rape victim whose application was for medical termination of pregnancy.”
The Bench further recorded that both the minor and her mother had clearly consented to the medical termination at their own risk and did not want the baby to be born.
The High Court directed the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to personally conduct an inquiry to determine responsibility for the circumstances surrounding the treatment. The inquiry is to examine the doctors involved, including the Head of the Department of Gynecology, as well as the minor, her mother and the Investigating Officer who accompanied her to the hospital.
The Court directed that the inquiry report be submitted in a sealed cover within two weeks.
The Bench also directed the hospital to provide full care to the mother until her recovery. The newborn was ordered to remain in the Children Hospital and not be handed over to anyone without the Court's permission. All expenses relating to the delivery and post-natal care of the mother and child were directed to be borne by the hospital, with the Chief Medical Officer instructed to ensure that no expenses, including medicines, were charged to the petitioners.
The matter has been listed for October 12, 2026, with the Medical Superintendent, Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Priyank Chaurasia and the Investigating Officer directed to remain present as specified by the Court.
Case Details
Case Title: X (Minor Victim) v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others
Case Number: Writ-C No. 37559 of 2026
Judges: Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad
Decision Date: September 23, 2026
