The Bombay High Court has sought Maharashtra's response to a PIL challenging a 2024 government resolution allowing court intervention in pregnancy cases beyond 24 weeks involving vulnerable women. The plea seeks a clear SOP, medical and neonatal care protocols, and rules on financial liability and doctors' responsibilities in late-term cases.

The Bombay High Court has sought the State's response to a PIL seeking clearer rules for pregnancy cases beyond 24 weeks | AI Generated Image

Mumbai, September 15, 2026: The Bombay High Court on Tuesday sought the Maharashtra government’s response to a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging a provision in the State’s June 2024 government resolution (GR) that allows court intervention in post-24-week pregnancy cases involving vulnerable women, including rape survivors, minors and persons with disabilities.

A division bench of Chief Justice MC Tripathi and Justice Advait Sethna issued notice to the State and posted the petition for hearing on October 9.

The PIL, filed by the Medico Legal Society of India (MLSI) through paediatrician Dr Rajeev Joshi, specifically challenges a clause in the June 3, 2024 GR concerning such late-term pregnancies.

Concerns Over Court Intervention

`;

According to the petition, the provision has effectively prevented State-designated Medical Boards from dealing with these cases and shifted the clinical and administrative burden to the judiciary. The plea said women and minor rape survivors are forced into prolonged litigation despite already facing severe physical and emotional trauma.

The petition has sought quashing of the court-intervention provision and framing of a clear standard operating procedure (SOP) for pregnancies beyond 24 weeks.

The PIL also raises concerns over the medical consequences of late-term terminations. It states that procedures beyond 24 weeks can result in the birth of a live premature infant, requiring immediate specialised neonatal intensive care.

NICU Capacity And Costs

Pointing to a shortage of NICU facilities, the plea said there was no clarity on who would bear the cost of intensive care if a baby was born alive following a court-authorised procedure. It has sought directions for the State to bear such expenses.

The petition also highlighted the legal uncertainty faced by doctors. It referred to an FIR registered against a gynaecologist in Satara in 2026 for carrying out a court-ordered termination, besides contempt proceedings involving doctors at AIIMS.

Legal Uncertainty For Doctors

According to the plea, doctors are caught between judicial directions, professional and ethical responsibilities and the threat of criminal prosecution.

The PIL further points to differences between the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 2021, government guidelines and the 2024 GR, particularly regarding feticide and pre-term delivery.

Also Watch:

It has sought detailed protocols for pregnancies involving foetal abnormalities, minor rape survivors and other cases beyond 24 weeks. The petitioners have also urged clear guidelines on medical responsibilities, neonatal care and financial liability to reduce uncertainty for women, families and doctors.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

Add As a

Trusted Source