Analysis on “Minor Rape Victim’s Right to Abort Against that Of Foetus to live“

Must Read

Explained: The Scope of Article 21 During the Era of COVID-19

“One’s right to self, their body, their health, and their livelihoods is inherent to living a meaningful human life, Human...

Why Are the Big Techs of Silicon Valley Accused of Anti-Competitive Behaviours?

The big tech giants of the Silicon Valley are facing major challenges with relation to their monopolistic powers after...

KSK announces Sanjay Kumar as a Partner for Pharma & Life Sciences Practice

New Partner for KSK's Pharma & Life Sciences Practice King Stubb & Kasiva recently announced that Mr Sanjay Kumar has...

The Debate Between IPR and Competition Law Explained

There are various market processes or structures that govern market scenario. For simplicity, this paper focuses on two mechanisms:...

The Competition Law Regime and Re-Tooling Patent Pools In India

The adversity to acquire licenses of various patented technologies can thwart the commercialization as well as the development of...

Solving Healthcare Issues Using Blockchain Technology

In troubled times that follow a pandemic, almost all nations are forced to take stock of the gaps present...

Follow us

A two-judge bench in Rajasthan High Court on the 1st of May, 2020, set aside the order passed in October 2019. The Court held that the rape victim’s Right to abort outweighs the foetus’ Right to life.

The Bench comprised of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Sandeep Mehta. They held that a woman’s reproductive choice is a fundamental right. In case of minor rape victims, her Right to abort ‘heavily outweighs’ the foetus’ Right to life.

Article 21: ‘Reproductive Choice is a Fundamental Right’

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees to every person the Right to Life and Liberty. With time, this has also come to include the Right to Reproductive Choice. This Right is not absolute as the foetus also has the Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21.

In India, abortion is allowed only in cases of mental or physical injury and within 12 to 20 weeks of pregnancy. No matter how much the law stresses on a woman’s autonomy in matters of abortion, the reality is different.

Laws Related to Abortion in India

The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 regulates the Right to an abortion. The grounds of abortion under this Act are:

  • Where the pregnancy will cause injury to the physical or mental health of the woman and
  • Where there is a risk that the child will suffer from such physical or mental injury.

The Act considers ‘rape’ as an act which affects the mental health and hence is a ground to abort. However, abortion is only allowed within 12 to 20 weeks of pregnancy. Post this, the woman has to approach the High Court or Supreme Court for permission.

Present Case: ‘State of Rajasthan & Anr. v. Ms S

A minor was sexually assaulted and was later discovered to be pregnant. She approached the District Court for the termination of her pregnancy. Since she was a minor, the case was transferred to the Court of a Special Judge dealing with POSCO cases.

The Medical Report suggested that there was no physical or mental threat to the victim. Further, it stated that termination of pregnancy if allowed, will not lead to any injury to the victim. But the Judge dismissed her application since her pregnancy had exceeded 20 weeks.

Decision of the Lower Court

The Court held that the Right to Life of the foetus deserves consideration. The Court cannot invoke the Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21 for the victim alone. It is also available to the unborn child. Further, the Court observed that ‘Navjeewan Sansthan’ was willing to protect the child. They also assured a dignified life for the petitioner. Thus, the Court must give the Right to Life of the unborn child precedence over the Right of the victim.

The Court dismissed the application and issued certain guidelines. They did this because of a balance between the Right to Privacy of the victim and the Right to Life of the unborn child. It issued directions to ensure a comfortable pregnancy and delivery. These directions also included protecting the privacy and dignity of the victim.

An Appeal in the High Court

A Petitioner filed a special appeal in the High Court of Rajasthan. The Court observed that the single bench Judge has failed to make apt considerations. Unfortunately, by the time the Court heard the petition, the victim was close to 9 months of pregnancy.

The Court stated that the provisions of the MTP Act, 1971 are reasonable restrictions on the Right to Reproductive Choice. It observed that a woman’s privacy, dignity and bodily integrity should be respected. It recognized that reproductive choices include procreation and to abstain from procreation.

Medical opinion has stated that giving birth at an early age causes great risk to the well-being of the mother. In the present case, the victim is only 17 years old. The Court further observed that rape affects the mental health of a woman. In this case, the victim conceived because of the sexual assault. It means that it was a forced pregnancy against her choice. To further continue with the pregnancy will remind her about the crime all the time. The victim might carry a constant feeling of remorse.

Thus, the Court took into consideration all these matters and decided in favour of the victim. The Court held that the Right of the pregnant woman outweighs the Right of the foetus. It further held that the trial court should have allowed the request for termination.

The Court issued certain guidelines to avoid such an unfortunate case in the future. These are to be mandatorily followed by the authorities involved. This decision overruled the judgement given last year in October. The Court finally recognized the supremacy of a woman’s autonomy in matters of abortion.

Concluding Remarks 

One new law may not ensure a change in mindset. However, the Court’s judgment surrounding the case of a rape victim has set a new precedent. This judgment is a huge achievement, especially in a country where bodily autonomy regarding pregnancy is non-existent. The State’s interest has been so inclined to preserving the life that it takes away the victim’s chance of ever leading a normal life after a sexual assault.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -