Rajasthan High Court rejected a request by the father of a minor rape victim to terminate his daughter’s 26-week pregnancy, as it was considered medically dangerous for both the girl and the fetus.

the bank of Justice Avneesh Jhingan ruled that the social, economic and psychological impacts had to be taken into account when making the decision, however, the psychological aspect based on social pressure itself was not enough to put two lives in danger.

According to the petition filed by the father, a medical board was constituted to examine the victim. The first report submitted by the medical board revealed that the pregnancy was in the high-risk category and taking into account the hemoglobin levels as well as the platelet count of the victim, the risk in termination was considered to have multiplied.

The medical board was instructed to give a clear opinion, in its next report, on whether the symptoms that make termination of pregnancy dangerous could be treated immediately. In the following report, the medical board concluded that terminating the pregnancy at that stage would entail a high risk to both the victim and the fetus compared to continuing the pregnancy.

However, based on the psychological evaluation of the victim and the social condition of her family, it was stated that continuation of the pregnancy would be stressful and taking into account the physical and psychological impact, the medical board suggested termination of the pregnancy.

“In psychological analysis, it relies heavily on the fact that the victim and her father are afraid of having a bad reputation in society and facing difficulties in marriage, so they may be ostracized.”

The Court stated that despite having a clear direction, the medical board did not give any opinion on whether the symptoms making termination of pregnancy dangerous could be treated immediately and, since this was an urgent matter, no further could be given. time for the same.

The Court held that the arrest of the victim and the father was justified, however, to reach a decision on the termination of the pregnancy, many dimensions had to be considered. Among them, the most relevant consideration was the health of the mother and fetus, and the chances of survival of the fetus.

In this sense, the Court ruled that the psychological impacts alone were not sufficient to put two lives in danger. The Court also gave certain instructions to deal with the arrests of the victim and her father, which included the complete privacy of the victim’s identity at all stages; free medical facilities; handing over the child to the child welfare committee after birth for adoption, prompt granting of interim compensation to the victim, etc.

Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

Qualification: Minor Victim Through Natural Guardian v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Citation: 2024 Live Law (Raj) 326

For the petitioner(s): Ms. Sangeeta Kumari Sharma

For the respondents: Mr. Vigyan Shah, AAG with Mr. Yash Joshi and Mr. Pulkit Bhardwaj, AGC; Mr. Neeraj Batra, GC; Mrs. Suman Shekhawat, Dy.GC with Mr. Virendra Pratap Singh; Mr. Rajendra Singh Rathore; Mr. Braj Narain Sharma, CWC, President, Kota

Click here to read/download the order