Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a 25-year-old unmarried woman, approached the Delhi High Court seeking permission for termination of her pregnancy at approximately 24 weeks. The pregnancy arose from a consensual relationship which later failed.

The petitioner argued that she was financially incapable of raising the child and was also mentally unprepared for motherhood, further stating that continuing the pregnancy would cause social stigma and mental distress.

The matter was examined in light of Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which governs the circumstances under which termination of pregnancy is permissible.

The Court observed that termination up to 20 weeks is generally permissible, while termination between 20–24 weeks is allowed only for specific categories of women under Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003. 

Issues Involved

  1. Whether an unmarried woman whose pregnancy arose from a consensual relationship can seek termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971.
  2. Whether the petitioner falls within the categories of women eligible for termination of pregnancy up to 24 weeks under Rule 3B of the MTP Rules, 2003.
  3. Whether exclusion of unmarried women from Rule 3B violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • She was unable to continue the pregnancy due to financial and psychological difficulties.
  • Compelling her to carry the pregnancy would lead to serious mental trauma and social stigma.
  • The non-inclusion of unmarried women under Rule 3B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 is arbitrary and discriminatory, thereby violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
  • The Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to grant relief and permit termination of pregnancy. 

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 clearly prescribes the conditions under which pregnancy may be terminated.
  • Under Section 3(2)(b) of the Act read with Rule 3B of the MTP Rules, 2003, termination of pregnancy between 20 and 24 weeks is permitted only for specific categories of women.
  • The petitioner, being an unmarried woman with pregnancy arising out of a consensual relationship, does not fall within any category mentioned under Rule 3B.
  • Therefore, the Court cannot grant relief contrary to the statutory framework. 

Court Findings

The Delhi High Court held that:

  • Section 3(2)(a) permits termination of pregnancy up to 20 weeks.
  • Section 3(2)(b) allows termination up to 24 weeks, but only for women covered under Rule 3B of the MTP Rules, 2003.

Rule 3B includes categories such as:

  • Survivors of rape or sexual assault
  • Minors
  • Women whose marital status changed during pregnancy (widowhood or divorce)
  • Women with physical disabilities
  • Mentally ill women
  • Cases involving substantial foetal abnormalities
  • Women affected by disasters or humanitarian emergencies

The Court observed that the petitioner does not fall under any of these categories.

The Court further stated that granting interim relief at this stage would effectively amount to allowing the writ petition itself, which is not permissible.

Accordingly, the Court held that while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, it cannot go beyond the statutory provisions and refused to grant permission for termination of pregnancy.


Court Order

The Delhi High Court declined permission for termination of pregnancy on the ground that the petitioner, being an unmarried woman with pregnancy from a consensual relationship, does not fall within the categories specified under Rule 3B of the MTP Rules, 2003.

Important Clarification

Subsequently, the matter reached the Supreme Court, which took a broader interpretation of the law and held that unmarried women cannot be denied access to safe abortion solely on the ground of marital status.

The Supreme Court observed that exclusion of unmarried women would be discriminatory and contrary to Article 14, and therefore the provisions must be interpreted purposively.

Sections Involved

  • Section 3(2)(a), Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
  • Section 3(2)(b), Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971
  • Rule 3B, Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003
  • Article 14, Constitution of India
  • Article 21, Constitution of India
  • Article 226, Constitution of India    

Link to download the order -  https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/YVA24012024CW173762022_172141.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.