This is an archive article published on February 14, 2025
Bombay HC permits woman to terminate 25-week pregnancy at private hospital despite 24-week bar
The petitioner had approached the HC stating that she was unable to terminate pregnancy at her chosen private hospital in the city due to the said rules.
3 min readMumbaiUpdated: Feb 14, 2025 05:21 AM IST
The private hospital also submitted an affidavit stating that it complied with the required criteria under MTP Rules and has required facilities for the same. It said it has the required approval of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to conduct termination of pregnancy.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday allowed 35-year-old woman to terminate her 25-week pregnancy at a private hospital of her choice. The court granted the relief citing “utmost urgency” despite present Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Rules provide that private institutions can terminate pregnancies only up to 24 weeks.
The petitioner had approached the HC stating that she was unable to terminate pregnancy at her chosen private hospital in the city due to the said rules.
“Conscious of the right of the Petitioner to reproductive freedom, her autonomy over the body and her right to choice, the medical condition of the Petitioner and having considered the findings and opinion of the Medical Board, we permit the Petitioner to medically terminate the pregnancy,” a bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Neela K Gokhale noted in the order.
“The Petitioner has indicated her desire that the delivery procedure, etc., has to be done in a hospital of her own choice. We permit her to do the same. However, the Medical institution so chosen by her shall have the requisite approval of Rule 5 of the MTP Rules,” it added.
The petitioner, through advocates Meenaz Kakalia and Shruti Kumar, had approached the HC, after which the medical board of doctors from state-run JJ Hospital examined her case. It recommended termination of pregnancy, stating that the foetus had skeletal dysplasia and other conditions, and the same has high post-natal morbidity. It said the multiple corrective surgeries would be required for severe deformities.
The panel opined that there were potential risks of infertility for the child in future and hypogonadism. The panel also said the petitioner was physically fit for termination of pregnancy.
Kakalia submitted that there was a lacunae in form A to be submitted for approval for termination as same comprises of two categories, including termination of pregnancy up to 12 weeks and that up to 24 weeks.
Story continues below this ad
She added that there was no third category for termination of pregnancy beyond 24 weeks, therefore, the private hospital was unable to go on with the same, and therefore it requires HC’s approval.
She further argued that the petitioner must be allowed to undergo termination procedure of her choice as per guidance notes issued by the central government.
The private hospital also submitted an affidavit stating that it complied with the required criteria under MTP Rules and has required facilities for the same. It said it has the required approval of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to conduct termination of pregnancy.
The court allowed the plea and also permitted that petitioner’s chosen medical practitioner to perform the procedure as per guidance notes of central government.
Story continues below this ad
It left the larger issue related to lacunae in form A under Rule 5 (2) of the MTP open, which will be deliberated upon during the next hearing on March 10.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
