Court affirms reproductive autonomy and interprets mental health under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act to include distress from marital discord.
New Delhi, January 6, 2026: The Delhi High Court has ruled that a married woman’s decision to undergo an abortion, taken within the statutory framework of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act due to marital discord affecting her mental health, cannot be criminalised as an offence under Section 312 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna delivered the judgment on January 6, 2026, in X v. State & Anr, arising from proceedings under IPC Section 312 (causing miscarriage). The order addresses the intersection of reproductive choice, mental health, and criminal liability.
Background and Key Legal Issue
The petitioner, a married woman, underwent an abortion at 14 weeks of pregnancy. The termination was sought on the ground that marital discord was adversely affecting her mental health. Subsequently, she was summoned under Section 312 IPC, which penalises causing miscarriage.
The central legal issue before the Court was whether a decision to terminate pregnancy, taken due to marital discord impacting mental well-being, could constitute an offence under IPC when the procedure was conducted in compliance with the MTP Act, 1971.
Statutory Framework and Court’s Analysis
The MTP Act permits abortion up to 20 weeks of gestation for specified grounds, including risk to the mental health of the pregnant woman. The Court observed that the Act recognises a woman’s reproductive autonomy while setting procedural safeguards.
Justice Krishna emphasised that:
- The mental health of a woman cannot be narrowly construed, it must include the actual or reasonably foreseeable environment of the woman.
- Marital discord, which causes mental trauma or severe stress, falls within the ambit of mental health considerations under the MTP Act’s provisions.
- Restricting the interpretation of mental health to only physiological conditions would undermine the legislative intent.
The Court also referenced Rule 3B of the MTP Rules, 2021, related to termination between 20 and 24 weeks, and held that it should be interpreted purposively, recognising changes in a woman’s material circumstances that affect her mental health.
Rejecting the notion that marital discord must reach a certain legal threshold (e.g., separation or litigation) before being considered, the Court held that stress and mental anguish at any stage could legitimately justify seeking termination.
Final Ruling
The High Court quashed the summoning order under Section 312 IPC, holding that the petitioner’s actions, carried out within the statutory parameters of the MTP Act, do not constitute a criminal offence. The Court underscored that:
- A woman’s bodily integrity and reproductive choice are constitutionally protected.
- Forcing continuation of a pregnancy against the woman’s will, especially when mental health is at stake, violates her rights and could be deleterious to her well-being.
- Criminalising lawful abortion undermines access to safe medical care and may push women towards unsafe procedures.
Court’s Reasoning (Brief)
The judgment elaborated that:
- Mental health under the MTP Act must be interpreted broadly to include trauma related to marital discord.
- Autonomy over reproductive decision-making is a fundamental aspect of a woman’s rights and cannot be subordinated to moralistic arguments that prioritise an unborn foetus over the lived experience of a woman.
- The doctor’s assessment in forming an opinion on the necessity of the termination must account for the woman’s actual or reasonably foreseeable environment, including socio-familial stressors.
Practical Implications
- The judgment reaffirms that reproductive autonomy and mental health considerations under the MTP Act cannot be converted into a criminal offence when lawful procedures are followed.
- It underscores the broad interpretation of mental health within abortion jurisprudence, including stress arising from marital discord as a valid ground for termination.
- By quashing the IPC summons, the Court reinforces that safe, legal abortion under the MTP Act takes precedence over imposition of criminal liability where statutory conditions are met.
- The judgment aligns with evolving jurisprudence advocating women’s bodily autonomy and access to abortion services without unnecessary legal or procedural hurdles.
The judgment adds clarity on the scope of mental health under the MTP Act and affirms that lawful termination of pregnancy, even when sought on account of marital discord, does not attract criminal liability when conducted in compliance with statutory provisions.
