MTP Gestational Limits Don't Apply To Substantial Foetal Abnormalities: J&K HC

Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the Superintendent of Lalla Ded Hospital, Srinagar, to constitute a competent Medical Board at once to examine a woman carrying a pregnancy of about 31 weeks, in which serious foetal abnormalities were detected late, and to act immediately on the Board's opinion regarding early termination.

The Court also criticised registered medical practitioners, particularly those in medical-college-associated and district hospitals, for failing to discharge their duties under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971, which pushes women to approach courts.

Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani heard a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by a married couple. They sought a direction to the Principal, Government Medical College, Srinagar, and the Medical Superintendent, Lalla Ded Hospital, Srinagar, to constitute a Medical Board to examine the wife for medical termination of her pregnancy.

The petitioners submitted that early scans showed a normal foetus with no gross congenital anomaly. The scans were done at 12 weeks 6 days on 08.05.2026 and at 21 weeks 4 days on 26.07.2026. On 24.09.2026, at 31 weeks 6 days, an ultrasound revealed polyhydramnios, a large communicating cystic structure in the foetal lumbar spine measuring about 83 × 72 × 82 mm, mild ventriculomegaly and findings suggestive of Arnold Chiari Type-II malformation. A Fetal MRI on 25.09.2026 confirmed a large posterior spinal defect with a cystic sac of about 6.0 × 6.5 × 8.3 cm, consistent with open spinal dysraphism with a large myelomeningocele.

They further submitted that consultations at GMC Anantnag and Lalla Ded Hospital corroborated these findings. A medical record dated 29.09.2026 noted that the prognosis for morbidity and mortality had been explained to the parents. It also noted that the mode and timing of termination were to be decided by the parents with the obstetrician, but that, because of the advanced stage, termination could not be undertaken without the Court's intervention. According to the petitioners, the delay was not attributable to the mother, who had undergone regular antenatal care, and the case warranted consideration under the statutory framework for termination beyond the ordinary gestational limit in cases of substantial foetal abnormalities.

The Senior Additional Advocate General, appearing for the Union Territory, accepted notice and submitted that the MTP Act and the 2003 Rules provide a complete mechanism for termination. He suggested that the mother be referred to the tertiary-care maternity hospital, Lalla Ded Hospital, with a direction to the Superintendent to have her examined by a competent Medical Board. The Board's opinion should then guide the decision, keeping in view Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Act.

After going through the petition and the medical records, the Court held that the matter could be disposed of at the threshold. It reproduced Section 3 of the MTP Act, including sub-section (2-B), Section 5 and Rule 3-B of the 2003 Rules. Sub-section (2-B) provides that the gestational limits in sub-section (2) do not apply where termination is necessitated by the diagnosis of substantial foetal abnormalities by a Medical Board. Rule 3-B(f) covers foetal malformation carrying a substantial risk of being incompatible with life, or of serious handicap if the child is born.

Disposing of the petition, the Court directed the Superintendent of Lalla Ded Hospital to constitute a competent Medical Board, qualified under the Act, to examine the mother. It also directed the Superintendent to take immediate action on the Board's opinion on early termination, through an approved and recognised medical procedure. The Court clarified that if termination is advised and the baby is born alive, immediate neonatal ICU treatment must be provided within the hospital. The procedure, if advised, is to be carried out at the earliest, after completing the requisite formalities under medical protocol, including the consent of the husband or parents of the petitioner.

Before parting with the matter, the Court observed:

“The registered medical practitioners especially doctors working in the associated hospitals of medical colleges and in other district hospitals do not shoulder their statutory responsibilities in terms of the provisions of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 and the rules of 2003 framed thereunder in justified cases thereby leaving the aggrieved mothers at the mercy of the God...”

The Court said such mothers are forced to bear further mental agony and the burden of approaching courts for legal directions. It added that where statutory directions are clear, the responsible medical practitioners, especially the Medical Boards that exist in almost every district under the Act and the Rules, should not avoid attending such emergent cases. It noted that Section 3(2-B) and Section 5(1) of the MTP Act clearly show that the provisions relating to the length of pregnancy do not apply where termination is necessitated by substantial foetal abnormalities diagnosed by a Medical Board, or is immediately necessary to save the pregnant woman's life.

The writ petition was disposed of along with the connected application, and a copy of the order was directed to be sent forthwith to the Superintendent, Lalla Ded Hospital, for compliance.

Appearances:

For the Petitioners: Mr. Owais Qadri, Advocate, vice Mr. Asif Wani, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Mohsin S. Qadri, Sr. AAG, with Ms. Maha Majid, Assisting Counsel.

Case Title: UJ & Anr. vs. Union Territory of J&K & Ors., WP(C) 2532/2026 (CM No. 6870/2026), decided on 06.10.2026