Madras HC allows Abortion of a 30-Week Pregnancy for Teen Assault Survivor

Madras High Court allows 30-week abortion for teen assault survivor, overriding 24-week legal limit.

The case was presided over by Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy.

(Source: Madras High Court Website)

A 16-year-old sexual assault survivor was granted permission by the Madras High Court to terminate her 30-week pregnancy, despite the statutory 24-week upper limit set by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. The court’s order was issued after the minor’s mother filed a petition seeking urgent medical intervention due to the advanced stage of pregnancy and the trauma experienced by her daughter.

According to The Indian Express, Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy presided over the case and emphasised that reproductive choice is an integral aspect of a woman’s bodily privacy. The court directed the hospital to immediately constitute a medical board to assess whether the termination could be performed safely without endangering the minor’s life.

The minor, who had not initially disclosed the assault, was found to be 30 weeks pregnant during a medical evaluation. The hospital had previously declined to proceed with the abortion due to the pregnancy exceeding the 24-week legal threshold. Court documents indicated that a case was registered under relevant sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the POCSO Act, 2012, following the mother’s discovery of the pregnancy.

Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Madras High Court reiterated that the right to terminate a pregnancy is linked to reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. The court noted that both the survivor and her guardian had consented to the procedure. It further stated that if a pregnancy can be safely terminated, potential side effects alone are not sufficient grounds to deny an abortion, provided the woman’s life is not at risk. The court observed, “Notwithstanding the age of the fetus or the term of the pregnancy, the 1st respondent shall immediately constitute a Medical Board. Upon examining the victim child, if it is found that medical termination can be performed without endangering her life, the same shall be carried out at the earliest possible time.”

“The right to terminate a pregnancy concerns her reproductive rights and bodily autonomy, and in the present case both the survivor and her guardian have consented to termination of the pregnancy.”

In its order, the court instructed the hospital to act without delay and not to wait for a certified copy of the order. Further directions clarified that the medical board’s assessment should be the basis for proceeding, and the termination must be conducted in accordance with the board’s guidance and applicable law.

At the time of the order, the minor was already admitted to the hospital. The court’s decision underscored that, wherever possible, medical termination should be permitted even beyond the 24-week period if it does not endanger the woman’s life. Legal analysis highlighted that the court’s approach aligns with established principles prioritising the health and autonomy of the pregnant individual.

The case sets a precedent for considering exceptions to the statutory limit in circumstances involving minors and survivors of sexual assault. The court’s intervention was based on the specific facts of the case, including the survivor’s age, the trauma suffered, and the medical opinion regarding the feasibility and safety of the procedure. The hospital was directed to ensure compliance with the court’s order and to prioritise the minor’s well-being throughout the process as the situation developed.

Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.