Rajasthan HC Declines Plea By Minor Rape Victim’s Father To Terminate Her Pregnancy, Cites Her Unwillingness & Unborn Child’s Right To Life
The Rajasthan High Court has rejected a father’s petition to terminate his minor daughter’s pregnancy following alleged rape on the basis of the daughter’s unwillingness to undergo the procedure. The Court opined that the consent given by the guardians could not override the autonomy and decision of the pregnant victim.
The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand held that granting permission, as sought by the parents, would not only violate the victim’s Right to Life but also infringe the right to life of the fetus/unborn child in the womb of the victim, as guaranteed under Article 21.
“If the unborn has life, though it is not a natural person, it can certainly be considered as a person within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution, for there is absolutely no reason to treat an unborn child differently from a born child. In other words, the right to life of an unborn shall also be considered as one falling within the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution.”
The Court was hearing a petition filed by a father seeking her minor daughter’s termination of pregnancy alleging that she was raped.
On the other hand, the Court perused letters and statement received from Rajasthan Legal Services Authority (RSLSA); Child Welfare Society, Alwar; and the victim herself, that contradicted the fact of the father.
The victim had stated that owing to the harassment and abuse by her parents, she had left the home on her own volition and was living with her lover. In this light, she had expressed her desire to give birth to the child and was not willing to terminate the 22-week pregnancy. She had further stated her desire to remain in the Child welfare home till she turns 18.
In this light, the Court rejected the permission sought by her parents and held that the victim had considerable understanding of the social and economic implications associated with raising a child.
It opined that Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act required that consent of natural guardian was required for termination of pregnancy of a minor. However, the Act was silent on a situation where there was a conflict between the views of a minor and her guardian that gave enough room for judicial interpretation.
“This Court is of the considered opinion that a minor has the right to beget and create a life, which is one of the facets of Right to Life guaranteed under Article 21…reproductive choice of the mother “K”, which is a facet of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, will have to give way to the right of the unborn child to be born.”
Accordingly, the petition was rejected, and the State was directed to provide proper medical facilities to the victim. The RSLSA was directed to submit quarterly report confirming proper care to the child and the victim. Further the Superintendent of Police was directed to monitor the entire process and submit quarterly report on compliance.
Title: Victim v State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Citation: 2025 Livelaw (Raj) 268
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma with MS. Kamini Pareek, Mr. Sarthak Chobey and Mr. Gaurav sharma
For Respondent(s): Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, Aag with Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma Mr. Yash joshi and ms. Tanvisha pant for Mr. Vigyan shah, aag