In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court ruled that a woman’s right to choose (reproductive autonomy) is more important than the rights of an unborn child. The court allowed a minor girl to end her 30-week pregnancy, stating,“The court cannot compel any woman to complete her pregnancy if she is otherwise not intending to do so.”

The Supreme Court bench, led by Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, cancelled an earlier order from the Bombay High Court which had directed that the teenager be given comprehensive medical and psychological support until delivery and then send the baby to an orphanage for adoption.

Origin Of The Case:

The case originated when a 17-year-old girl entered into a relationship with a male friend. The minor alleges that the individual coerced her into a physical relationship under the false pretext of marriage. Consequently, a First Information Report (FIR) was filed against the male friend.

The girl’s mother filed an appeal in the Supreme Court after the Bombay High Court rejected the minor’s plea to terminate the pregnancy. The High Court instead directed the teenager to carry the pregnancy to term and subsequently place the child for adoption.

The girl’s counsel emphasized that forcing the girl to complete the pregnancy would result in significant mental trauma, largely due to the social stigma associated with ‘giving birth to an illegitimate child’.

During the proceedings, Justice B.V. Nagarathna addressed the moral and practical hurdles women encounter when seeking termination of pregnancy, stating:

“Sometimes it takes time to take a decision whether to terminate or not. There are so many cases where termination takes place beyond what’s stipulated under the MTP Act. And doctors say we won’t do it. Where will they go? To quacks and unauthorised doctors”

Court’s Order :

The Bench granted permission for the medical termination of pregnancy (MTP), contingent upon the mother providing a written undertaking of her consent for the procedure."

The Court said- “The appellant’s daughter is presently at J.J. Group of Hospitals, Mumbai. We direct the J.J.Group of Hospitals, Mumbai to conduct the procedure of Medical termination of pregnancy of the daughter of the appellant herein by bearing in mind all medical safeguards.”

Case Details: A (Mother of X) Vs State of Maharashtra SLP(C) No. 4774/2026