Court can't compel any woman: Supreme Court okays termination of 30-week pregnancy
The Supreme Court has allowed the termination of a 30-week pregnancy of a minor, emphasising reproductive autonomy and observing that a court cannot compel a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy.
The Supreme Court on Friday observed that no court can compel a woman -- much less a minor -- to continue an unwanted pregnancy, underscoring the primacy of reproductive autonomy. The remarks came while permitting the medical termination of a 30-week pregnancy of a girl who had conceived when she was a minor.
A Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan stressed that the reproductive autonomy of the pregnant girl must be accorded due weight, particularly when she has clearly and consistently expressed her unwillingness to carry the pregnancy to term.
Referring specifically to the case, the court noted that “what has to be considered in the instant case is the right of the minor child to continue the pregnancy,” especially given that the pregnancy was unintended, and the girl did not wish to give birth.
“If the interest of the mother is to be taken note of, then her reproductive autonomy must be given sufficient emphasis. The court cannot compel any woman, much less a minor child, to complete her pregnancy if she is otherwise not intending to do so,” Live Law quoted the court order.
Allowing the plea, the Supreme Court directed Mumbai’s JJ Hospital to carry out the medical termination of the pregnancy, ensuring that all necessary medical safeguards are followed.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna acknowledged the complex moral and legal questions involved. She observed that while the birth of a child ultimately results in a new life, the decisive factor in the present case was the minor’s clear and unwavering decision not to continue the pregnancy.
"It is also difficult for us to decide what to do. Whether we should compel her to give birth to a child? Because the child which will be born is also ultimately going to be a life. Then there is another question: if she can terminate at 24 weeks, why not at 30 weeks? Ultimately, she doesn't want to continue the pregnancy. Bottom line is she doesn't want to give birth, that is the difficulty," Justice Nagarathna said.
The Supreme Court has, in recent years, consistently upheld women’s bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. In a significant observation in 2024, the court held that the right to choose and reproductive freedom is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“The right to choose and reproductive freedom is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, where the opinion of a minor pregnant person differs from the guardian, the court must regard the view of the pregnant person,” the Supreme Court had said.
In another 2022 judgment, the court ruled that all women -- married or unmarried -- are entitled to seek abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and the accompanying rules.
The Supreme Court on Friday observed that no court can compel a woman -- much less a minor -- to continue an unwanted pregnancy, underscoring the primacy of reproductive autonomy. The remarks came while permitting the medical termination of a 30-week pregnancy of a girl who had conceived when she was a minor.
A Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan stressed that the reproductive autonomy of the pregnant girl must be accorded due weight, particularly when she has clearly and consistently expressed her unwillingness to carry the pregnancy to term.
Referring specifically to the case, the court noted that “what has to be considered in the instant case is the right of the minor child to continue the pregnancy,” especially given that the pregnancy was unintended, and the girl did not wish to give birth.
“If the interest of the mother is to be taken note of, then her reproductive autonomy must be given sufficient emphasis. The court cannot compel any woman, much less a minor child, to complete her pregnancy if she is otherwise not intending to do so,” Live Law quoted the court order.
Allowing the plea, the Supreme Court directed Mumbai’s JJ Hospital to carry out the medical termination of the pregnancy, ensuring that all necessary medical safeguards are followed.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna acknowledged the complex moral and legal questions involved. She observed that while the birth of a child ultimately results in a new life, the decisive factor in the present case was the minor’s clear and unwavering decision not to continue the pregnancy.
"It is also difficult for us to decide what to do. Whether we should compel her to give birth to a child? Because the child which will be born is also ultimately going to be a life. Then there is another question: if she can terminate at 24 weeks, why not at 30 weeks? Ultimately, she doesn't want to continue the pregnancy. Bottom line is she doesn't want to give birth, that is the difficulty," Justice Nagarathna said.
The Supreme Court has, in recent years, consistently upheld women’s bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. In a significant observation in 2024, the court held that the right to choose and reproductive freedom is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“The right to choose and reproductive freedom is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. Therefore, where the opinion of a minor pregnant person differs from the guardian, the court must regard the view of the pregnant person,” the Supreme Court had said.
In another 2022 judgment, the court ruled that all women -- married or unmarried -- are entitled to seek abortion up to 24 weeks of pregnancy under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and the accompanying rules.