24-Week Limit Cannot Alone Decide Pregnancy Termination, Rules Delhi High Court

24-Week Limit Cannot Alone Decide Pregnancy Termination, Rules Delhi High Court in Minor V v. State of NCT of Delhi

Case: Minor V through Grandmother M v. State of NCT of Delhi and Another
Citation: 2026:DHHC:2446
Date of Judgment: 24 October 2026
Court: Delhi High Court
Coram: Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar

Court Observation

“The question of medical termination of pregnancy cannot be merely determined or restricted by the statutory period of 24 weeks, but must be examined in the context of the facts and circumstances of each case, including the age and the reason of such pregnancy, the medical opinion placed on record, and the rights and the interest of the pregnant woman.”

Summary

The Delhi High Court has permitted the medical termination of a pregnancy exceeding 29 weeks for a 17-year-old rape survivor, holding that the 24-week statutory period under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, cannot by itself determine such cases. Each case must be examined on its own facts, including the age of the pregnant woman, the circumstances of the pregnancy, the medical opinion on record, and her rights and interests.

The minor, acting through her grandmother, invoked Articles 226 and 21 of the Constitution and Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking termination under Section 3(2) of the MTP Act. The pregnancy was unwanted and conceived from rape, for which an FIR had already been registered at Police Station Khyala, Delhi. The Medical Board constituted for termination beyond 24 weeks found her medically and psychologically fit for the procedure.

The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in S v. Union of India (2026 INSC 446), in which termination at 28 weeks was permitted, and noted that constitutional courts exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 or Article 32 are not constrained by the MTP Act’s limits and must prioritise welfare, dignity, bodily integrity and reproductive autonomy, particularly for minors. No woman, much less a minor rape survivor, can be compelled to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term merely because the gestational limit has been crossed.

Key Holdings

  • The question of medical termination of pregnancy cannot be determined or restricted merely by the 24-week statutory period under the MTP Act.
  • Each case must be examined in light of its facts, including the age and the reason for the pregnancy, the medical opinion on record, and the rights and interests of the pregnant woman.
  • Constitutional courts are not constrained by the MTP Act’s gestational limits and must prioritise welfare, dignity, bodily integrity and reproductive autonomy, particularly for minors.
  • A minor rape survivor cannot be compelled to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term merely because the statutory gestational limit has been crossed.

Directions Issued

  • The petition is allowed and the procedure shall be carried out by competent doctors under the MTP Act and its rules, with a complete record kept by the Medical Board.
  • The hospital shall preserve the foetal tissue for DNA testing in the pending criminal case.
  • The State shall bear the expenses of the procedure, the stay and post-operative care.
  • If the child is born alive, the hospital and State authorities shall ensure all feasible medical support, keep the child in an incubator and inform the Child Welfare Committee; if the minor and her family so wish, the child is to be given in adoption as per procedure.
  • The authorities shall strictly protect the survivor’s identity.

Background

The minor, aged about 17 years, approached the Court through her grandmother, submitting that continuing the pregnancy would cause grave mental injury and psychological trauma. She was admitted to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital, where the Medical Board found her medically and psychologically fit for termination. The State submitted that appropriate directions could be passed in light of the Board’s report and the prevailing law.

Disclaimer: This is a summary prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the official judgment for the authoritative text.

Tags: , ,