No Woman Can Be Compelled To Continue Pregnancy, Court Order Sufficient If Guardian Reluctant To Bear Medical Risk: Kerala High Court Permits Termination At 27 Weeks For Minor Rape Survivor

Affirming that bodily autonomy and the right of choice cannot be defeated by procedural hesitations, the Kerala High Court, presided over by Justice Harisankar V. Menon, on October 28, 2026, held that termination of pregnancy for a minor sexual assault survivor can proceed on the basis of judicial orders even if the legal guardian is unwilling to assume the medical risks of the procedure.

The writ petition was instituted on behalf of a 15-year-old sexual assault survivor weighing barely 48 kilograms, represented by a fit person appointed by the Child Welfare Committee, seeking permission to terminate a pregnancy advanced to over 25 weeks. The constituted Medical Board confirmed that the fetus had reached a gestational age of 27 weeks and two days, highlighting risks such as excessive bleeding and hysterotomy, and opined that the procedure could be carried out subject to high-risk consent from the guardian.

Whether a 15-year-old sexual assault survivor carrying a 27-week pregnancy is entitled to medical termination under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, notwithstanding gestational age and medical complications, and whether the reluctance of a guardian to execute a high-risk undertaking can impede the court from directing the procedure.

Evaluating the findings of the Medical Board, the High Court observed that while the medical experts pointed out the advanced gestational age and the risk of neonatal complications or surgical intervention affecting future fertility, the survivor's age and physical condition warranted decisive judicial intervention. The Court noted that the minor weighed only 48 kilograms and had been subjected to grave trauma.

Reproductive autonomy under Article 21 strictly protects a woman's right to refuse forced pregnancy.

The Court drew strength from the binding precedent laid down by the Supreme Court in S. v. Union of India, which established that no individual or authority can force a pregnant person to carry an unwanted pregnancy to full term against their volition.

Reiterating this legal stance, the Single Judge emphasized that what unequivocally matters in jurisprudence surrounding reproductive autonomy is whether the pregnant female actually intends to bring the child into the world. In the case of a 15-year-old child subjected to sexual abuse, compelling her to endure the physical and psychological trauma of pregnancy would run contrary to settled constitutional guarantees.

Reluctance of the guardian to execute high-risk consent cannot defeat the minor's right to medical termination.

Addressing the Medical Board's stipulation that high-risk consent must emanate from the guardian, the Court ruled that administrative or medical hesitations cannot stand as a hurdle when the minor has unambiguously expressed her desire to terminate the pregnancy.

The Court held that should the guardian demonstrate unwillingness to shoulder the medical risks or execute undertakings, the medical termination must nevertheless be executed under the explicit authority of judicial orders passed by the High Court.

Mandatory protocols instituted for neonatal resuscitation, medical care, and surrender under the JJ Act.

Balancing medical contingencies, the Bench directed that should the fetus be born alive despite the procedure, the State is legally mandated to render comprehensive neonatal care and immediate access to intensive medical facilities.

The Court further clarified that in the event of a live birth where the minor survivor refuses custody of the infant, the newborn must be unconditionally surrendered to a recognized adoption agency or child care institution strictly in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

Allowing the writ petition, the High Court directed the State of Kerala and the team of designated government doctors to execute the medical termination of the minor's pregnancy forthwith upon securing her written undertaking, while ordering that all consequential neonatal and post-procedure statutory protocols be supervised by the Government Medical College.

Date of Decision: October 28, 2026