MP High Court directs shifting of 17-year-old pregnant victim, found living with accused lover, to Nari Niketan under POCSO Act for protection and care.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Madhya Pradesh: In a crucial move under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the relocation of a 17-year-old pregnant rape victim who was found residing in the house of the accused man she claimed to love.
This suo motu action by the Court underscores the nuanced intersection of child protection laws, reproductive rights, and judicial responsibility.
Background of the Case
The suo motu writ petition (WP No. 27514 of 2025) was initiated following a reference by the Special Judge of the POCSO Court in Mauganj, District Rewa, who sought permission for the medical termination of the minor’s pregnancy.
The prosecutrix/ victim, pregnant for over 26 weeks, was reportedly living with the accused, which prompted judicial intervention considering her minority status under law.
Despite directions from the Court, the police reported that the minor refused to undergo a medical examination or consider abortion. She stated that she was in love with the accused and did not wish to terminate the pregnancy. Her hemoglobin was reported to be critically low (5.3), which initially made termination medically inadvisable.
Court’s Observation
Recognizing her autonomy, the Court relied on the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in A (Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra (2024) 6 SCC 327, which reiterated that reproductive choices are protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. This includes the right to either terminate or continue a pregnancy, regardless of age, provided the individual has sufficient understanding of the decision.
Justice Vishal Mishra quoted from the Supreme Court’s decision,
“The choice to continue pregnancy to term, regardless of the court having allowed termination of the pregnancy, belongs to the individual alone.”
The Court further noted that if the views of a minor and her guardian differ, the minor’s perspective must be regarded as an important factor when deciding the issue of termination.
Justice Vishal Mishra also observed,
“The prosecutrix is aged about 17 years, and being a minor, she cannot reside in the house of the accused.”
ALSO READ: Karnataka Govt. To High Court: “BS Yediyurappa Should Face Trial in POCSO Act Case”
Accordingly, the Court directed the police authorities to hand the victim over to her parents. If the parents were unwilling to keep her or the girl refused to stay with them, the authorities were instructed to relocate her to Nari Niketan, Mauganj/Rewa, until she attains the age of majority. The Superintendent of Nari Niketan was also directed to provide necessary care and precautions in view of her pregnancy.
“Therefore, the Police Authorities are directed to hand over the prosecutrix to her parents and if they are not willing to keep the prosecutrix with them or the prosecutrix show her willingness not to reside with the parents, then she should be shifted to Nari Niketan (Mauganj/ Rewa) under intimation to the Superintendent of Police, District Mauganj. The Superintendent of Nari Niketan is directed to take all care and precaution concerning the victim/ prosecutrix as she is having a pregnancy of 26 weeks & 4 days as per the earlier medical report. The prosecutrix shall stay at Nari Niketan till she attains the age of majority.”
Since the prosecutrix did not consent to the termination of her pregnancy, and in light of the Supreme Court’s precedent protecting her reproductive autonomy, the High Court declined to order termination. The petition was subsequently disposed of.
Case Title: PROSECUTRIX X Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
WRIT PETITION No. 27514 of 2025
READ ORDER HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on POCSO Act
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Madhya Pradesh High Court
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
