Court directs officials to appear by video conferencing on May 4, warns charges may be framed if order permitting termination of 30-week pregnancy is not implemented
Notice Issued In Contempt Plea
The Supreme Court has issued notice in a contempt petition concerning AIIMS, New Delhi.
The plea alleges that AIIMS failed to comply with the Court’s recent order.
The order had permitted medical termination of the 30-week pregnancy of a 15-year-old girl.
A Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan passed the order.
The Bench directed the alleged contemnors to remain present before the Court through video conferencing on Monday, May 4.
The alleged contemnors include the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
They also include the Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, and the Director, AIIMS, New Delhi.
Court Warns Of Framing Charges
The Supreme Court said it would proceed further if its order was not complied with by May 4.
It also indicated that it may frame charges in the contempt proceedings after hearing the parties.
Justice Nagarathna observed that the Court was concerned only with compliance.
The Judge said:
“If they do not comply with our order by Monday, then let them be prepared for further directions in the contempt proceedings. We are not concerned with anything but that the order of this court is complied with.”
She further said that if the order was not complied with by Monday, the Court would frame charges after hearing them.
Contempt Plea Filed By Minor’s Mother
The minor girl’s mother filed the contempt petition.
The plea arose from the Supreme Court’s April 24 order.
Through that order, the Court had permitted termination of the minor’s pregnancy.
The pregnancy had crossed seven months.
The Court had earlier held that a woman cannot be forced to continue an unwanted pregnancy only because the child may later be given up for adoption.
Choice Of Pregnant Woman Held Paramount
In its earlier order, the Supreme Court said the choice of the pregnant woman must remain paramount.
The Court observed that forcing a woman to continue an unwanted pregnancy would cause grave trauma.
This was especially serious because the pregnant person was a minor.
The Court said such compulsion could cause mental, emotional and physical harm.
It further held that forcing continuation of pregnancy would violate Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court also noted that such an approach would place the welfare of the unborn child above the welfare of the pregnant woman.
Plea Was Beyond Statutory Limit Under MTP Act
The Supreme Court was hearing a plea filed by the mother of the minor girl.
She sought permission to terminate the pregnancy beyond the statutory limit under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act.
The Union of India opposed the plea.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that termination at such an advanced stage could endanger both the minor and the child.
He also suggested adoption through the Central Adoption Resource Authority.
In addition, he offered financial assistance.
Court Rejected Adoption And Financial Support Argument
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati had sought counselling for the minor girl.
She submitted that counselling was necessary to ascertain the girl’s wishes.
However, the Supreme Court rejected the view that the minor should continue the pregnancy because of financial support or a possible adoption arrangement.
The Court held that it could not force a woman to depend on such alternatives.
It said this was especially true when she was unwilling to continue the pregnancy.
Pregnancy Arose From Consensual Relationship Between Minors
The Supreme Court noted that the pregnancy arose from a consensual relationship between two minors.
It also recorded that the girl had clearly stated that she did not want to continue the pregnancy.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the termination at AIIMS, New Delhi.
However, it made the procedure subject to medical safeguards.
Review Petition By AIIMS Dismissed
After the April 24 order, AIIMS filed a review petition.
The institution challenged the direction permitting termination.
The same Bench dismissed the review petition.
The Court also made strong observations against AIIMS.
It said it was “strange” that AIIMS was not inclined to obey the Supreme Court’s order.
The Court further observed that AIIMS appeared to be attempting to defeat the constitutional rights of the minor.
Curative Petition Not Entertained
Thereafter, AIIMS filed a curative petition.
The matter was mentioned before a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
However, the Court refused to entertain the curative petition.
It reiterated that AIIMS could not impose its decision on the woman.
The Court said the woman must be allowed to take an informed decision.
AIIMS Allowed To Counsel, Not Dictate Decision
ASG Aishwarya Bhati submitted that the foetus was 30 weeks old and viable.
She also submitted that termination could cause irreversible harm to the minor.
Therefore, she suggested that the Court wait for the birth.
She also suggested that the child could later be given up for adoption.
However, the Court said an unwanted pregnancy cannot be forced upon a woman.
Justice Bagchi observed that the decision must rest with the girl and her family.
He said AIIMS could explain all medical aspects to them.
However, AIIMS could not take the decision for them.
The Court allowed AIIMS doctors to counsel the girl and share medical reports.
At the same time, it refused to allow AIIMS to return to Court to press its own position.
Case Details
Case Title: S [Mother of N] v. Punya Salila Srivastava
Case No.: Conmt. Pet.(C) No. 233/2026 in C.A. No. 6667/2026
Diary No.: 26229/2026
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
