Expressing concern over the failure to provide timely medical assistance to rape victims, the Allahabad High Court observed that even decades after the enactment of relevant laws, the inability of the State machinery to ensure timely access to Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) services for rape and POCSO victims is clear evidence of institutional and administrative failure.
The Court observed that,
“A systematic and sustained violation of the fundamental rights of child rape victims enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution, Section 39 of the POCSO Act, Section 3(2)(b) of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act as amended in 2021, and the directions of the Supreme Court of India in X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, NCT of Delhi (supra) has been observed across the State.”
The Court held that delay in matters relating to termination of pregnancy directly infringes upon the physical, mental, and reproductive rights of the victim.
The order was passed by Justice Vinod Diwakar while hearing the case of Baru Singh and another. The instant petition had been filed by the grandfather of a 17-year-old mentally challenged rape survivor seeking permission for termination of her unwanted pregnancy of approximately five months.
An FIR had been registered against the accused at Rohta Police Station, Meerut, under Sections 328, 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
Considering the alarming circumstances, the Court emphasized that every single day is crucial in cases involving termination of pregnancy, as termination beyond 24 weeks becomes legally and medically far more complex.
Despite this, the victim had to struggle for nearly 54 days before receiving relief.
Read also: CMO Has No Authority to Cancel Hospital Registration
The Court categorically observed that,
“The plight of child victims in such cases reflects deep institutional insensitivity.”
According to the facts of the case, the Medico Legal Examination Report of Sexual Violence revealed that the victim was pregnant for 22 weeks and 6 days.
Further, a writ petition was filed before the High Court. The Court, vide order 04.08.2023, directed the Chief Medical Officer, Meerut, to constitute a Medical Board and also directed that a team of doctors under the guidance of the CMO shall carry out the abortion, if the fetus could be aborted without danger to the life of the victim.
In the whole process, consent of the grandfather of the minor victim was required to be obtained after due verification.
Ultimately, the victim delivered a child on August 13, 2023 and she was handed over to the police on August 15, 2023.
It was noticed by the Court that CMO, Meerut, had not constituted the Medical Board in accordance with the provisions of the MTP Act, 1971, and the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003.
Subsequently, in her statement recorded before the A.C.J. (J.D.) Meerut, she had clearly expressed that she did not wish to keep the child.
The Court further submitted that,
“….owing to the State’s administrative machinery simply not functioning, and it began functioning, even minimally, only under the compulsion of judicial oversight.”
After analyzing data from across the State, the Court expressed concern that between 2013 and 2023, only 106 cases involving rape survivors, who had become pregnant were referred to Medical Boards.
Referring to the number of cases registered across key districts, the Court observed that,
“The 525 cases placed before this Court represent only the most visible portion of a vastly larger crisis of child rape, institutional failure, and unremedied suffering. The true number of unmarried child rape victims who became pregnant and received no meaningful institutional support, medical care, or legal redress is immeasurably greater than the number registered with the police.”
Read also: Mere Allegation of Cheque Misuse Not Enough to Deny Interim Compensation u/s 143-A NI Act
Upon further examination, the Court noted that the number of “Support Persons” appointed under the POCSO Act, 2012 and the Juvenile Justice framework remains grossly inadequate when compared to the actual requirement.
The Court clarified that the responsibility of the State does not end with registration of a criminal case. It also extends to providing medical assistance, counseling, rehabilitation, support in decisions relating to pregnancy termination, and legal protection to the victim.
However, the concerned departments have failed to effectively discharge their statutory obligations.
Examining the systemic deficiencies, the Court further observed that the districts where children are most vulnerable and welfare mechanisms are weakest are also the districts where victims and their families have the least access to justice.
This structural inequality, according to the Court, represents one of the gravest failures of the system.
The Court also highlighted that,
“The most alarming finding in the entire dataset is not where cases are high – it is where they are inexplicably zero.”
The Court thus concluded that despite the passage of more than a decade, the State Government had never undertaken any comprehensive examination of issues concerning rape survivors, children born as a consequence of sexual assault, and their future welfare and rehabilitation. The Court considered this a serious indicator of systemic failure.
Finally, the Court issued detailed directions to the State Government, National Medical Commission, Uttar Pradesh Medical Council, the Health Department, the Director General of Police, Child Welfare Committees, and District Legal Services Authorities.
It directed the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh to constitute an expert committee comprising academicians, research scholars, data scientists, policy experts, bureaucrats, and doctors to study issues relating to rape survivors, children born out of rape, abandoned infants, and the effectiveness of existing rehabilitation mechanisms, and to suggest appropriate reforms.
Disposing of the petition, the Court reiterated that the existence of law in such sensitive matters becomes meaningful only when its benefits reach the victim in a timely and effective manner.
Case: Baru Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
Case No: Matters Under Article 227 No. 8129 of 2023
Date of Order: 29.05.2026
Status: Disposed of
