The Delhi High Court has declined to halt criminal proceedings against a medical practitioner accused of illegally terminating the pregnancy of a 16-year-old girl and failing to inform law enforcement authorities about the minor patient.
In an order issued on August 5, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav ruled that the prosecution records establish a case requiring trial. The court emphasized that doctors cannot rely on unverified verbal declarations regarding a patient’s age when performing medical procedures governed by age-specific legal standards.
Age Verification Mandatory Under MTP Act
Addressing statutory provisions, the court highlighted that under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, a minor lacks the legal capacity to consent to an abortion on her own. The law mandates obtaining written consent from a guardian prior to carrying out the procedure.
Justice Kaurav noted that verifying and documenting a patient’s age through official identification is a foundational requirement for medical practitioners. The court observed that accepting an oral statement provided by an accompanying adult without supporting documentation fails to meet legal obligations and dismantles statutory safeguards designed to protect minors.
False Identity and Delayed Reporting
The case originates from a July 2019 incident in which the 16-year-old girl underwent a procedure to terminate a six-week pregnancy. An accompanying woman, who claimed to be the girl’s aunt, informed hospital staff that the pregnancy involved the teenager’s boyfriend and stated the patient was 20 years old.
Hospital staff recorded the age as 20 without requesting or collecting any identity or address proof. Subsequent police investigations revealed that the accompanying adult had no actual relationship with the girl. According to the prosecution, the doctor became aware of the patient’s minor status during the procedure but did not report the matter to law enforcement, resulting in a 70-day delay in registering a First Information Report.
Trial Court Orders Upheld
Following a September 2020 trial court order directing further investigation into whether medical staff knowingly concealed the minor’s age, police filed a supplementary chargesheet naming the doctor as the sole accused under Section 313 of the Indian Penal Code for causing a miscarriage without consent. The trial court subsequently took cognisance under Section 21 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, which penalizes the failure to report cases involving minors as required under Section 19 of the Act, and summoned the doctor.
The High Court rejected the doctor’s petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, finding no legal infirmity in the trial court’s September 2020 investigation order or the July 2021 summoning order. The court stated that the law does not provide an unrestricted right to terminate pregnancies on demand and affirmed that the trial against the doctor must proceed.
