Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal X. Y. Z. vs Maasaheb Meentai Thakre Hospital Ne...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

X. Y. Z. vs Maasaheb Meentai Thakre Hospital Nerul - Medical Termination of Pregnancy

Favicon for indiankanoon.org India Bombay High Court
Filed March 21st, 2026
Detected March 22nd, 2026
Email

Summary

The Bombay High Court has issued a judgment regarding a writ petition concerning the medical termination of pregnancy for a minor. The court reviewed a report from the District Medical Board, constituted under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which examined the minor and provided findings on the viability of the fetus.

What changed

The Bombay High Court, in its judgment dated March 21, 2026, in the case of X.Y.Z. vs Maasaheb Meenatai Thakre Hospital Nerul, has addressed a writ petition concerning a minor's medical termination of pregnancy. The court took on record the report of the District Medical Board, established under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which included examination findings and a Form D report for termination beyond 24 weeks, noting the fetus's gestational age and weight.

This judgment signifies the court's active role in overseeing complex medical and legal decisions involving minors and pregnancy termination, particularly when exceeding standard gestational limits. Regulated entities, such as hospitals and medical boards, must ensure strict adherence to the procedures and reporting requirements outlined in the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, when handling such sensitive cases. The court's involvement highlights the critical need for thorough documentation and adherence to established medical and legal protocols.

What to do next

  1. Review Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 procedures for minors.
  2. Ensure all medical reports for pregnancy termination beyond 24 weeks are complete and accurate.
  3. Consult legal counsel on cases involving minors and complex pregnancy termination scenarios.

Source document (simplified)

Select the following parts of the judgment
| Issues | Petitioner's Arguments |
| Court's Reasoning | Conclusion |
For entire doc: Unmark Mark

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

X. Y. Z. vs Maasaheb Meentai Thakre Hospital Nerul ... on 21 March, 2026

Author: Bharati Dangre

Bench: Bharati Dangre

2026:BHC-AS:13557-DB

                                                                                  1-WP-3611-2026.odt

            rajshree

     Digitally
     signed by
     RAJSHREE
                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

RAJSHREE KISHOR
KISHOR MORE
MORE Date:
2026.03.21
13:42:47
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
+0530

                                                WRIT PETITION NO.3611 OF 2026

                        X.Y.Z. Through her father                           ....Petitioner
                                         V/S
                        Maasaheb Meenatai Thakre
                        Hospital Nerul & Ors.                               ....Respondents Mr.Sarvesh Deshpande a/w Ms.Mansi Dande for the Petitioner.
                        Mrs.M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State.

Ms.Anjali Helekar a/w Mr.Advait Helekar for Respondent No.2.

CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE &
MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ

                                                      DATE   : 21st MARCH 2026
                                                               (IN CHAMBER)

                        Oral Judgment (Per Bharati Dangre J) :

1 Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

2 In furtherance of our order dated 18/03/2026, Mrs. M.P.
Thakur, the learned Government Advocate has produced before
us the report of examination of the minor girl, represented
through her father.
The report under the signature of Civil Surgeon, Civil
Hospital thane dated 20/03/2026 inform that in terms of the
directions of this Court, the District Medical Board was

                                                            1-WP-3611-2026.odt

constituted under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act,
1971
, under the Chairmanship of Civil Surgeon , with two
Gynecologists as well as Radiologist, Pediatrician and
Psychologist being its members.

It is informed that the girl was examined on 19/03/2026
and after due examination and and consideration of all medical
findings, the District Medical Board has prepared its report.

3 The Report forwarded to the Court dated 20/03/2026 is
taken on record and marked as 'X' for identification.

It is accompanied with Form D, which is the report about
the medical termination beyond 24 weeks. The Gynecology
Department has specifically expressed its opinion as below :

"Patient is unmarried 14 years old with single viable fetus in
cephalic presentation.

As Ultrasound on 19.03.2026 suggestive of gravid uterus with live
single viable fetus in cephalic presentation, 28 weeks, with foetal
weight 1159 gm + 173 gm.

If terminated at this stage baby may born alive and need NICU
care."
Similar is the opinion expressed by the Pediatric
Department.

The Radiology Department has specifically indicated that
the Ultrasonography of gravid shows a single viable fetus in in
cephalic presentation with average gestational age of 28 weeks.

4 The opinion of the Medical Board for termination of
pregnancy is in the positive and the justification is to the
following effect :-

1-WP-3611-2026.odt

"6) Opinion by Medical Board for termination of pregnancy - Allowed.
After taking detailed history and conducting thorough clinical
examination, and review of reports by the Gynaecologist, Radiologist,
Paediatrician, and Psychiatrist, the District Medical Board, Thane has
formed the following opinion:

As per ultrasonography dated 19/03/2026 & 20/03/2026, there is a single
live intrauterine fetus of gestational age 28 weeks, with estimated fetal
weight of 1159 gm ± 173 gm, in cephalic presentation with no gross fetal
anomaly.

Continuation of pregnancy may lead to pregnancy related complications
like Anaemia, pregnancy induced Hypertensions as well as complication
during labour. It is also going to have Psychological impact on pregnant
mother (minor) with uncertain future.

Pregnant mother (minor) and her mother have expressed desire to
terminate the pregnancy and are made aware of the dangers of
continuation of pregnancy as well as termination of pregnancy. Surgical
intervention might required. After termination of pregnancy at this stage
baby may delivered alive and baby may require NICU Care. And this
situation explained to her relatives.

Since the pregnancy has advanced to 28 weeks, well beyond legal limits of
termination of pregnancy i.e. 24 weeks. The termination can only be done
with Hon'ble Court permission.

7) Physical fitness of the woman for the termination of pregnancy - Yes."
5 The Petitioner's father is present before us and we again
inquired with him about the termination of pregnancy and in no
uncertain terms he made it clear that the pregnancy be
terminated as his daughter is minor and the pregnancy is
unwarranted. We are also informed that the girl is already
hospitalized in Civil Hospital, Thane.

6 In the wake of aforesaid, since the minor girl through her
father had made a clear choice of terminating the unwarranted
pregnancy by exercising her right not to give birth to the child,

                                                         1-WP-3611-2026.odt

and the District Medical Board is in favour of termination of the
pregnancy, as it is indicated that continuation of the pregnancy
may lead to pregnancy related complications like anemia
alongwith hyper-tension as well as complications during labor
plus it will also have psychological impact upon the mother with
uncertain future.

Since the minor girl alongwith her father has expressed
desire to terminate the pregnancy, they were made aware about
the dangers of continuation of pregnancy as well as termination
and it was also indicated that surgical intervention might be
required. However, since the consensus is expressed to undergo
the procedure, we permit the pregnancy of 28 weeks to be
terminated and we direct the Civil Hospital, Thane to start the
procedure forthwith, as we are informed that the minor girl is
admitted in the hospital.

We also make it clear that if the baby is born alive and need
NICU care, the hospital shall arrange for the same with no
liability being fastened upon the family of the minor girl. The
child is permitted to be then dealt with, in accordance with law.

With the abovesaid directions, Writ Petition is allowed.

[MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.] [BHARATI DANGRE, J.]

Named provisions

Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971

Source

Analysis generated by AI. Source diff and links are from the original.

Classification

Agency
GP
Filed
March 21st, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Document ID
2026:BHC-AS:13557-DB
Docket
1-WP-3611-2026.odt

Who this affects

Applies to
Healthcare providers
Industry sector
6211 Healthcare Providers
Activity scope
Medical Termination of Pregnancy
Threshold
Pregnancy termination beyond 24 weeks
Geographic scope
IN IN

Taxonomy

Primary area
Healthcare
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Public Health Medical Law

Get Courts & Legal alerts

Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when India Bombay High Court publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.