Supreme Court Urges Centre to Consider Amending Pregnancy Termination Laws for Rape Survivors
New Delhi, 30 April (H.S.): The Supreme Court has expressed strong disapproval regarding a plea filed by AIIMS seeking to overturn an earlier court order that granted a 15-year-old pregnant rape survivor permission to terminate her pregnancy. A
Supreme Court (file)


New Delhi, 30 April (H.S.):

The Supreme Court has expressed strong disapproval regarding a plea filed by AIIMS seeking to overturn an earlier court order that granted a 15-year-old pregnant rape survivor permission to terminate her pregnancy.

A bench presided over by Chief Justice Surya Kant addressed the central government, urging it to consider amending existing laws to permit the medical termination of pregnancies beyond 20 weeks in cases involving rape survivors.

The Court emphasized that when a pregnancy results from rape, there should be no rigid time limit for termination, as the law must evolve to reflect changing societal realities.

The bench noted that such incidents impose lifelong psychological trauma on the survivor, and while a pregnancy could technically be carried to term if there is no risk of permanent disability to the mother, the final decision must rest entirely with the victim.

During the hearing, AIIMS officials argued that termination was no longer feasible given the 30-week gestation period and suggested that the newborn could be put up for adoption; however, the Court firmly maintained that this choice remains the sole prerogative of the victim and her family.

This matter follows an order issued on April 24 by a bench led by Justice B.V. Nagarathna, which had authorized the minor to medically terminate her 30-week pregnancy. In that ruling, the Court asserted that a survivor cannot be compelled to carry a pregnancy against her will, regardless of the availability of adoption, as forcing a minor to do so would significantly impact her mental, emotional, and physical health . The survivor, who became pregnant following a consensual relationship with another minor, had sought relief after the pregnancy caused her severe mental distress, including attempts at self-harm and disruption to her education. Although Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had cited medical reports suggesting potential risks to both mother and child at this advanced stage, the Court prioritized the survivor's autonomy and well-being over alternative options like post-delivery adoption.

---------------

Hindusthan Samachar / Jun Sarkar


 rajesh pande