The Supreme Court on Thursday said the decision to terminate the pregnancy of a 15-year-old rape survivor should rest with the victim and her parents, with medical experts assisting them in making an informed choice.

Hearing the case, the court said institutions like AIIMS could guide the family so they can take a well-informed decision. It emphasised that an unwanted pregnancy cannot be forced on a survivor and highlighted the emotional and physical trauma involved.

‘Unwanted Pregnancy Cannot Be Thrust’

The bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, observed that forcing a minor to continue with a pregnancy resulting from rape would add to the suffering already endured and could leave lifelong psychological scars.

“This is an unwanted pregnancy of a 15-year-old child… unwanted pregnancy cannot be thrust on a person. Imagine she is a child. She should be studying now. But we want to make her a mother. Imagine the pain, the humiliation the child has suffered in this," the bench said.

The court said termination may be considered if it does not result in permanent disability to the mother, and reiterated that the final decision must lie with the survivor and her parents. It directed AIIMS to counsel the family to help them arrive at an informed choice.

Court Flags Need For Legal Reform

The court also asked the Centre to examine whether existing laws should be amended to allow termination of pregnancies beyond the current 20-week limit in cases involving rape survivors.

‘Law Must Evolve With Time’

Stressing the need for a more flexible legal framework, the court said there should ideally be no rigid time limit in such cases. “When there is a pregnancy due to rape, there should not be time limit. Law needs to be organic and in sync with evolving time," the court observed.

AIIMS Raises Medical Concerns

Appearing for AIIMS, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati said termination may not be medically feasible at this stage. She noted that the pregnancy had reached 30 weeks and the fetus was viable, adding that there could be risks of severe deformities and long-term health complications for the minor mother. She also suggested adoption as an option.

The court reiterated that the choice ultimately lies with the survivor and her parents, with medical experts aiding their decision. It also referred to an earlier order dated April 24, when a bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan had allowed termination of the 30-week pregnancy.

Source: News18