Synopsis

The petitioner, a 36‑year‑old married woman with a living child, sought permission from the High Court to medically terminate her pregnancy which had exceeded 32 weeks. Ultrasound scans conducted on 06.05.2026 and 07.05.2026 revealed serious fetal abnormalities, including partial agenesis of the corpus callosum (incomplete formation of the neural bridge connecting the brain’s hemispheres) and bilateral ventriculomegaly (enlargement of fluid‑filled ventricles, with the right side measuring 16.4 mm, crossing the threshold for moderate‑to‑severe). The Medical Board constituted by the court opined that while the condition may not be invariably incompatible with life, it carries a significant risk of neurological impairment and developmental disability. The court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in S vs. Union of India, held that reproductive autonomy is an intrinsic part of Article 21, that the existence of fetal abnormalities cannot be the sole basis for denying termination, and that the passage of time does not extinguish a woman’s right to make reproductive choices. Permission was granted, and the termination was directed to be carried out at Anupama Hospital under proper medical supervision with safeguards for the petitioner’s health and privacy.

1. Heading of the judgment

High court of karnataka at bengaluru

Writ petition no. 16035 of 2026 (gm-res)

Smt. xxxxxxxxxxxx (petitioner) vs. State of karnataka (respondent)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice suraj govindaraj

Core Law: Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to bodily autonomy, reproductive choice, decisional freedom, privacy and dignity – Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 – Permission for termination beyond statutory period – Fetal abnormalities.

Court: High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Suraj Govindaraj (Single Judge)
Date of Judgment: June 1, 2026
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 16035 of 2026 (GM-RES)
Citation: 2026:KHC:25550

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

• Constitution of India – Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty, including bodily autonomy, reproductive choice, decisional freedom, privacy and dignity)

• Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 – Sections 3, 5 (termination of pregnancy beyond 20 weeks in certain circumstances)

• Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 – Rule 3B (medical board opinion for termination beyond 24 weeks)

Subject matter of the judgment:

Whether a pregnant woman whose pregnancy has exceeded 32 weeks, and whose fetus has been diagnosed with serious congenital neurological abnormalities (partial agenesis of the corpus callosum and bilateral ventriculomegaly) carrying a significant risk of severe developmental disability, is entitled to permission for medical termination of pregnancy in exercise of her constitutional right to bodily autonomy and reproductive choice, notwithstanding that the statutory period under the MTP Act has long expired.

Key legal principles applied:

• Bodily autonomy as a fundamental right: The right of a woman to make reproductive choices is an inseparable component of Article 21. This includes the right to procreate and the right not to procreate, and the freedom to decide whether, when and under what circumstances to bear a child.

• Reproductive autonomy not contingent on fetal abnormality: To predicate access to termination on the existence of fetal abnormality is to make the exercise of a fundamental right contingent upon circumstances beyond the woman’s control. The constitutional foundation lies in the auto

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.