Logo
Court Book - India Code App - Play Store

advertisement

Rajasthan High Court Upholds Minor's Right to Continue Pregnancy, Rejects Parents' Plea for Termination

Shivam Y.

Rajasthan High Court rejects parents’ plea to terminate a 17-year-old minor’s pregnancy, upholding her constitutional right to choose motherhood under Article 21.

Rajasthan High Court Upholds Minor's Right to Continue Pregnancy, Rejects Parents' Plea for Termination

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has refused to permit the termination of a 17-year-old minor's pregnancy, emphasizing her constitutional right to make reproductive choices under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand delivered the order while hearing a petition filed by the victim's father seeking permission to abort the pregnancy, which resulted from alleged rape.

Read in Hindi

The court acknowledged that a child's life begins at conception and must be preserved at all stages. While the law recognizes a woman's autonomy to decide whether to continue or terminate a pregnancy, no force or coercion can compel her to abort against her wishes. The judgment reiterated that both the mother and the fully developed fetus have the right to life under Article 21.

Read also:- Himachal Pradesh HC Intervenes to Protect Young Couple from Harassment

The medical board confirmed that the victim was 22 weeks and 4 days pregnant and medically fit, with no complications. Under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, termination before 24 weeks is possible under certain conditions, but in this case, the victim clearly expressed her unwillingness to abort.

In her statement, the minor revealed that she wished to deliver the child and reside at the Child Welfare Committee in Kanpur until she turned 18. She also alleged abusive treatment by her parents and stated her desire to stay away from home. The court took note of her maturity, understanding of the consequences, and her advanced stage of pregnancy.

Citing Supreme Court precedents, including A (Mother of X) vs. State of Maharashtra and Suchita Srivastava vs. Chandigarh Administration, the court held that a minor's choice must be given importance, even if it differs from her guardian's decision. The judge observed that forcing termination would violate not only the victim's right to life but also the unborn child's right to be born.

Read also:- Delhi High Court Quashes FIR in Mutual Divorce Settlement Case

The court issued detailed directions to ensure the victim's well-being:

  • The State must provide complete medical facilities before and after childbirth.
  • A female nursing attendant must be appointed for her care.
  • The victim must be allowed to stay at the Child Welfare Committee until she reaches the age of majority.
  • All expenses for delivery, nutrition, education, and care must be borne by the State.
  • Privacy of the victim and child must be maintained at all stages.
  • Quarterly reports must be submitted to the court confirming proper care.

The petition was disposed of with these directions, firmly establishing that reproductive choice, even for a minor, is a personal and protected right under the Constitution.

Case Title:- Victim vs. State of Rajasthan & Others

Case No.:- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11124/2025