The Delhi High Court has reaffirmed that compelling a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term constituted an impermissible intrusion into her bodily autonomy, decisional privacy and personal liberty, all of which were integral to the guarantee of life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna underscored that reproductive choices, including decisions relating to continuation or termination of pregnancy, lie exclusively within the woman’s domain and cannot be subordinated to patriarchal notions of consent or control.
While examining the legality of criminal proceedings initiated against a woman for terminating her pregnancy, the High Court emphasised that bodily integrity encompassed a woman’s autonomy over her body, fertility and motherhood. The Court observed that forcing a woman to continue with an unwanted pregnancy not only infringes her constitutional rights but also exacerbates psychological distress, with serious implications for her mental health and overall well-being.
Taking judicial notice of prevailing social realities, the High Court noted that women facing marital discord are particularly vulnerable, and the burden of pregnancy in such circumstances often compounds their trauma. It observed that, in most cases, women are left to navigate the emotional, financial and social consequences of motherhood without institutional or familial support, a reality that cannot be ignored while adjudicating reproductive rights. The Court held that an unwanted pregnancy in such circumstances imposes disproportionate and often insurmountable hardships, leading to grave mental anguish.
These observations were made while setting aside criminal proceedings initiated against the woman under Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, which penalises causing miscarriage. The case arose from a complaint lodged by the woman’s estranged husband, who alleged that she had terminated her 14-week pregnancy without his consent. Acting on the complaint, a Metropolitan Magistrate had summoned the woman, and the summoning order was subsequently upheld by the sessions court.
Intervening in revision, the High Court quashed both orders, holding that criminalising a lawful medical termination of pregnancy carried out in accordance with statutory safeguards would amount to a direct violation of the woman’s fundamental rights. The Court clarified that the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, as amended in 2021, recognises a woman’s decisional autonomy and permits termination of pregnancy up to the prescribed gestational limits under medical supervision, without requiring spousal consent.
Rejecting the argument that the rights of the foetus should prevail over those of the woman, the Court noted that constitutional jurisprudence and international human rights law recognise the accrual of enforceable human rights at birth and not at conception. The Bench held that the interests of an unborn foetus cannot be elevated above the rights, dignity and autonomy of a living woman.
Finding that the termination had been carried out in compliance with the provisions of the MTP Act and under lawful medical supervision, the High Court held that no offence under Section 312 IPC was made out. Quashing the criminal proceedings, the single-judge Bench reinforced that statutory and constitutional protections could not be diluted by invoking penal provisions to police a woman’s reproductive choices.
The post Forced continuation of unwanted pregnancy infringes woman’s bodily autonomy: Delhi High Court appeared first on India Legal.