Supreme Court’s patch-work approach in abortion cases leaves the underlying legal problems on reproductive autonomy in India unaddressed
A recent approval by the top Court for medical termination of a 15-year old girl’s pregnancy is the latest addition to a case-by-case jurisprudence pushing for greater reproductive autonomy. But without access to courts, abortion remains a mounting challenge for women tangled in the MTP Act’s legal bottlenecks.
Tanishka Shah
Published on: 13 May 2026, 12:27 pm
ON APRIL 30, the Supreme Court brought to a close a significant reproductive rights case in recent Indian legal history by declining to hear a curative petition filed by All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi (‘AIIMS ‘) against the Court’s earlier order permitting the medical termination of a seven-month pregnancy of a 15-year-old girl. The minor was said to have attempted to commit suicide on two occasions since the factum of pregnancy was revealed to her.
Additional Solicitor General (‘ASG’) Aishwarya Bhati, representing AIIMS, argued that there was a high likelihood of the foetus being born alive if the procedure went ahead at the stage, and warned that the termination could cause irreversible health complications for the minor girl. However, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India (‘CJI’) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi underscored the reproductive autonomy of women while allowing the termination. Despite the pregnancy having crossed the statutory limit, the Court held that compelling a minor to continue an unwanted pregnancy would violate her rights to dignity, autonomy, and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Bhati had argued that what the Supreme Court would decide in this case would become the law of the land. Notably, the CJI remarked, "This should have been the law of the land in 2014*, when this Court unnecessarily interfered! What kind of...we are forcing a rape victim only because law does not adequately protect her? This is the unfortunate jurisprudence that at one point developed!"
In the present case, the pregnancy arose out of a consensual relationship between two minors. According to the law, however, owing to the girl’s minority, this is treated as rape.
“We are forcing a rape victim only because law does not adequately protect her? This is the unfortunate jurisprudence that at one point developed!,” CJI Surya Kant observed.
Pertinently, the Court asked the Centre to consider lifting pregnancy termination deadline of 24-weeks for rape victims, especially when the victims are children.
Background of the Case
In the first week of April, the mother (appellant in the present case) noticed unusual abdominal heaviness in her 15-year-old daughter and, upon medical examination on April 10, discovered that the minor was approximately 27 weeks pregnant. The appellant approached several doctors and clinics seeking termination of the pregnancy, but all refused to perform the procedure. She then moved the Delhi High Court seeking permission for termination.
On April 21, after the Medical Board had submitted its report, the High Court dismissed the plea, observing:
“It is of the opinion that continuation of the pregnancy is less likely to have adverse effects on the minor than termination of the same, which, according to it, carries significant risks, including to her future reproductive health. The psychiatric and psychological assessment of minor-N has not revealed any major psychiatric disorder in the past or at this point of time, and only some signs of emotional distress and adjustment difficulties related to pregnancy were seen. More importantly, as per the Medical Board, in case of delivery at present, the baby would be born alive, although it would require active resuscitation at birth.”
The matter was then appealed before the Supreme Court, where a bench of Justices B. V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan on April 24, 2026, set aside the High Court’s order and permitted the termination of the pregnancy. AIIMS subsequently filed a review petition, which the Court dismissed, criticising the institute for attempting to “defeat the constitutional rights of the minor daughter of the appellant.”
AIIMS thereafter filed the curative petition.
An incremental jurisprudence of reproductive autonomy
The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (‘MTP Act’) was amended in 2021, to raise the upper gestation limit from 20 to 24 weeks for specific vulnerable categories, including rape survivors, incest victims, minors, and differently-abled women. Beyond 24 weeks, for any reason other than foetal abnormality, the law offers no route which forces rape survivors including minors to approach courts.
