AIIMS has moved the Delhi High Court against an order permitting a 16-year-old rape survivor to terminate her 27-week pregnancy. The institute warned of risks to her future reproductive health.
New Delhi: Today, on July 3, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) has approached the Delhi High Court challenging a recent order that allowed a 16-year-old rape survivor to terminate her 27-week pregnancy.
The case has sparked intense legal and ethical debates concerning reproductive rights, medical guidelines, and the mental and physical well-being of minor survivors of sexual assault.
ALSO READ: Delhi HC Allows Minor Rape Survivor to Abort Pregnancy Beyond 24 Weeks
On June 30, a single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court had permitted the termination of the girl’s pregnancy despite it having crossed the 24-week legal limit under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act.
The decision came after the minor and her mother informed the court that they did not wish to continue with the pregnancy, citing the severe trauma and mental distress the girl was undergoing.
AIIMS, however, disagreed with the order and raised serious concerns regarding the girl’s reproductive health.
Appearing before a division bench led by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, AIIMS argued that carrying out the termination at this stage might harm the girl’s ability to conceive in the future.
The institute cited the advanced gestational age and the likelihood of requiring a cesarean section as medically risky for a minor.
Senior lawyer and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing AIIMS, told the court,
“As an officer of the court today I am urging your lordships to be ‘parens patriae’ of this young girl and protect her. She does not want the child, understandable. We, in AIIMS, will do everything best for the child.”
She explained that although AIIMS doctors would ensure the best care possible, the current situation was “precarious.”
She added,
“The girl was 27-week pregnant and the termination of her pregnancy would jeopardise her reproductive life and future chances of conceiving.”
Responding to the bench’s query on whether terminating the pregnancy even after 34 weeks could be safe, Bhati said yes, but she stressed the importance of the girl’s health and well-being at this stage.
She further referred to legal provisions in the MTP Act, explaining that abortion beyond 24 weeks is permitted only in two exceptional cases: if the pregnancy poses a serious threat to the woman’s life or if there are major congenital abnormalities in the fetus.
ALSO READ: RG Kar Rape-Murder || “Probe Indicates It Wasn’t a Case of Gang Rape”: CBI To Calcutta HC
Despite the AIIMS medical board’s opinion that the minor was physically fit, it was not in favour of allowing a termination at such a late stage. The board cited the requirement of a cesarean section and its possible impact on her long-term reproductive health.
However, the court had earlier ruled in favour of the girl’s request to terminate the pregnancy, stating that denying her that right would prolong her trauma.
The bench also made a strong observation during the hearing:
“Advising a rape victim to prolong her pregnancy will entail anxiety”, adding that such mental stress “could have a grave impact on her mental health.”
The matter was heard again on July 3, when the bench asked the minor’s mother and a member or chairperson of the medical board to be present in court for further discussions around 2:30 p.m.
The court was informed that the minor had been sexually assaulted twice—once during Diwali in 2024 by one individual and again in March by another. It was the second incident that resulted in the pregnancy. The girl had not told anyone initially due to fear and trauma.
She only discovered the pregnancy during a visit to the doctor with her sister. When her family got to know, she confided about both incidents of sexual assault. This led to the filing of an FIR in June, by which time the pregnancy had already crossed the 24-week limit.
The accused from the March incident has been arrested, while the person involved in the earlier assault is yet to be caught.
The single-judge bench, in its earlier order, had cited several Supreme Court and High Court judgments where abortions were allowed well beyond the 24-week limit—in some cases as late as 27 and even 33 weeks.
Based on these precedents, the court had directed AIIMS doctors to carry out the procedure safely while preserving full medical documentation and the fetus tissue for DNA testing and further investigation.
The court also ensured that the girl’s safety and well-being remain a priority.
It ordered that
“the state authorities to bear all the expenses of the medical procedure, the girl’s stay at the hospital and the expenditure of post-operative care.”
Background of the Case:
On June 30, the Delhi High Court permitted a minor rape survivor to terminate her pregnancy, which had crossed the 24-week legal limit under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971.
The pregnancy was a result of a sexual assault in March, though the girl had earlier been assaulted during Diwali last year but had not disclosed it.
The court observed,
“The situation in this case is unfortunate. The girl was subjected to sexual assault for the first time on Diwali but she did not divulge about this to anyone and she was again subjected to sexual assault in March by another person.”
She discovered the pregnancy only during a doctor’s visit, following which her family filed an FIR. By that time, the gestation period had crossed the statutory 24-week limit.
ALSO READ: Can’t Force Rape Survivor to Carry Unwanted Pregnancy, Rules Bombay High Court
Citing precedents, including Supreme Court rulings that allowed termination even at 27 to 33 weeks in cases involving rape and trauma, the court allowed the abortion.
The court noted,
“It is not difficult for this court to comprehend and understand the grave mental injury inflicted upon the minor.”
The police informed the court that the March accused had been arrested, while the Diwali offender was still at large. The court directed AIIMS doctors to carry out the procedure, preserve fetal tissue for DNA analysis, and keep detailed medical records.
“The AIIMS doctors, as a result, were ordered to maintain a complete record of the procedure aside from preserving the fetus tissue, which could be required for DNA identification and investigation purposes.”
The court also directed,
“The court further directed the state authorities to bear all the expenses of the medical procedure, the girl’s stay at the hospital and the expenditure of post-operative care.”
In case of a live birth, the court ordered,
“If the child is born alive, the medical superintendent of AIIMS along with state authorities shall ensure that every assistance is offered to such child and intimation will be given to the Child Welfare Committee.”
The girl’s mother supported the termination and said she had no objection to adoption in case of a live birth. The court recorded,
“Since the minor’s mother wants to get the pregnancy terminated, she has no objection if the child is born alive and given up for adoption.”
Case Title:
ABC (Minor) Through Her Mother v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Rape Case
