JUDGMENT : 1. Before proceeding to consider the prayer made in this petition, we find it appropriate to extract para 35 of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suchita Srivastava and another vs. Chandigarh Administration, 2009 9 SCC 1 . "35. The doctrine of "parens patriae" has been evolved in common law and is applied in situations where the State must make decisions in order to protect the interests of those persons who are unable to take care of themselves. Traditionally this doctrine has been applied in cases involving the rights of minors and those persons who have been found to be mentally incapable of making informed decisions for themselves." 2. The facts presented and the submissions made before us in this case call upon us to exercise our jurisdiction as "parens patriae" to safeguard the interest of a rape victim, who is minor. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel, learned Government Advocate, Sri Abhinav N. Trivedi, learned counsel representing King George's Medical University, and Sri J.N. Mathur, and Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, learned Senior Advocates, who have graciously provided their assistance to the Court on our request. 4. On 16.07.2019, the Court passed the following order:- "Having regard to the facts narrated in this petition, Registry is directed to register this case with changed cause title as 'Km.X Vs. State of U.P. and others'. Under no circumstances identity of the petitioner shall be disclosed. This petition filed by a minor (as per her date of birth recorded in the High School Certificate issued by Board of High School and Intermediate Education) narrates the distress, trauma and mental agony of a minor victim of rape and sexual abuse which she is under-going. More disturbing fact which we notice in this case is that as per the First Information Report, this victim is presently subjected to undescribable agony, that too at the hands of a person more than the age of her father. Perhaps, we cannot understand the anguish caused to the victim on account of about 21weeks' of her pregnancy caused by her physical violation. The prayer made by the petitioner through her father in this petition is that appropriate direction may be issued allowing the petitioner to get her pregnancy terminated. Perhaps, we cannot understand the anguish caused to the victim on account of about 21weeks' of her pregnancy caused by her physical violation. The prayer made by the petitioner through her father in this petition is that appropriate direction may be issued allowing the petitioner to get her pregnancy terminated. While considering the prayers made in this petition, we are conscious of the provisions contained in Section 3 of Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 which permits termination of pregnancy only in case length of pregnancy does not exceed twenty weeks, that too, if continuance of such pregnancy, in the opinion of two registered medical practitioners, involves a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or there is substantial risk that if the child is born, it would suffer from such physical and mental abnormalities which may render the child seriously handicapped. Having regard to the facts presented before us through this petition we, nonetheless, find it appropriate to get the petitioner examined by a Medical Board to be constituted by the Vice Chancellor of King Georges Medical, University, Lucknow. We order accordingly. The Medical Board to be constituted under this order shall comprise of 1. Head of the Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics or his/her nominee, 2. Head of the Department of Pediatrics or his/her nominee, 3. Head of the Department of Radio-diagnostics or his/her nominee and 4. A Psychologist/ Psychiatrist to be nominated by the head of the department of Psychiatry. This panel or Medical Board will comprise of the aforesaid doctors from King Georges Medical, University itself. We require the petitioner to be present in the Office of the Vice Chancellor of the King Georges Medical, University tomorrow i.e. 17.07.2019 at 10:00 am alongwith her parents. Once petitioner reports to the Vice Chancellor, she shall be examined by the aforementioned Medical Board/panel of doctors and a report of the Medical Board shall be submitted to this Court in a sealed cover through the Standing Counsel of the King Georges Medical, University, Sri Abhinava N Trivedi. Apart from the physical condition, both of the mother and the foetus as also examination of the foetus from various medical angles, the Board shall also opine about the Psychological trauma, if any, which the petitioner may undergo is she were to give birth to the child. Apart from the physical condition, both of the mother and the foetus as also examination of the foetus from various medical angles, the Board shall also opine about the Psychological trauma, if any, which the petitioner may undergo is she were to give birth to the child. The Medical Board shall also ascertain from the petitioner and her father or mother about her willingness to get the pregnancy terminated. List/put up this case day after tomorrow i.e. 18.07.2019, as fresh. Let the copy of this petition be furnished by the learned counsel for the petitioner to Sri Abhinava N Trivedi, learned Standing Counsel for King Georges Medical, University. Sri Abhinava N Trivedi, shall immediately apprise the Vice Chancellor of the King Georges Medical, University of this order who is requested to ensure that the directions issued above are complied with. We further request the Vice Chancellor to extend all the comfort to the petitioner during the period she is subjected to the medical examination, for which neither the petitioner nor her parents will be charged. Office is directed to furnish certified copy of this order to Sri Abhinava N Trivedi free of charge today itself. When the case is next listed, the name of Sri Abhinava N Trivedi shall also be shown as counsel for the petitioner." 5. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner appeared before the Medical Board which comprised of Head of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Head of the Department of Pediatrics, Head of the Department of Radiodiagnosis and one Professor in the Department of Psychiatry, King George's Medical University, Lucknow. 6. The medical report based on the medical examination conducted on 17.07.2019 has been placed before us by the learned counsel representing the King George's Medical University. Medical report of the petitioner 1. Opinion by Prof. Vivek Agarwal, Department of Psychiatry, KGMU I have examined the patient in question under Writ Petition No.19418 (M/B) of 2019. Currently, the patient in question is troubled by the fact that she is pregnant and she often keeps on thinking about it. She is talking less and her appetite has been reduced. She and family do not want to continue the pregnancy. Also, teenage pregnancy has lot of psychological effects on the girl. Currently, the patient in question is troubled by the fact that she is pregnant and she often keeps on thinking about it. She is talking less and her appetite has been reduced. She and family do not want to continue the pregnancy. Also, teenage pregnancy has lot of psychological effects on the girl. In my opinion, girl is not mature enough to physically and mentally handle the stress of pregnancy, child birth and later on taking care of offspring especially which is unwanted. 2. Opinion by Prof. Vinita Das, Head, Department of Obst. and Gynaecology and Prof. Shally Awasthi, Head, Department of Paediatrics, KGMU. The concerned girl has been examined by Prof. Vinita Das, HOD Obstetric & Gynaecology and Prof. Amita Pandey, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Age-16 years; LMP-Not sure of dates (around mid-January, 2019 according to girl); weight 45 kg. General examination-PR-86/min; BP-100/60 mm Hg; Respiratory rate-16/min; afebrile; Pallor, cyanosis, clubbing, icterus, pedal oedema not present; Chest-bilaterally clear, Heart sounds-normal. Per abdominal examination- Uterus 20-22 weeks size, external ballottement present. Diagnosis-GIPO+022 weeks+teenage pregnancy with no obvious complications. In view of 22 weeks+pregnancy (also confirmed by attached USG report), the girl is advised Iron, Calcium and Folic acid supplementation along with the following antenatal investigations-Hemoglobin, urine routine and microscopic, Blood grouping and typing, VDRL, HbsAg, HIV, HCV, S.TSH, 75 g 2 hour blood sugar testing. The issue was discussed with mother and concerned girl in presence of Prof. Shally Awasthi, HOD Paediatrics. Both of them do not want continuation of pregnancy and wish for termination. Psychiatry evaluation was also done by psychiatrist nominated by HOD Psychiatry Prof. P.K.Dalal. Continuation of pregnancy will definitely cause mental trauma to the minor girl. As the girl is in advanced pregnancy of 22+weeks, pregnancy can be terminated on the directives of the court. Termination may be attempted medically, initially using medications and the procedure may take around 2-3 days for completion. At times if pregnancy is not terminated medically, then surgical termination will be done by hysterotomy which involves the risk of anaesthesia and surgery as any other surgical procedure. 3. The opinion of Prof. Sunil Kumar, Head, Department of Radiodiagnosis, KGMU Ultrasound report of the patient Kumari X (Writ Petition No.19418 of 2019) is attached herewith. (Prof. Vivek Agarwal) (Prof. Vinita Das) (Prof Shally Awasthi) Department of Psychiatry Head, Department of Obst. 3. The opinion of Prof. Sunil Kumar, Head, Department of Radiodiagnosis, KGMU Ultrasound report of the patient Kumari X (Writ Petition No.19418 of 2019) is attached herewith. (Prof. Vivek Agarwal) (Prof. Vinita Das) (Prof Shally Awasthi) Department of Psychiatry Head, Department of Obst. & Gynaecology Head, Department of Paediatrics (Prof Sunil Kumar) Head, Department of Radiodiagnosis 7. As per our directions contained in the earlier order, the petitioner was examined by a Psychiatrist as well, nominated by the Department of Psychiatry of the University who has expressed his opinion which forms part of the medical report. Opinion of the Psychiatrist is extracted hereinbelow:- "I have examined the patient in question under Writ Petition No.19418 (M/B) of 2019. Currently, the patient in question is troubled by the fact that she is pregnant and she often keeps on thinking about it. She is talking less and her appetite has been reduced. She and family do not want to continue the pregnancy. Also, teenage pregnancy has lot of psychological effects on the girl. In my opinion, girl is not mature enough to physically and mentally handle the stress of pregnancy, child birth and later on taking care of offspring especially which is unwanted". 8. The petitioner and her mother have also made their statements before the doctors on 17.07.2019 at the time of medical examination of the petitioner which also is extracted herein-below:- ^^eq>s crk fn;k x;k gS fd esjh csVh ds xHkZ es lk<+s ikp¡ eghus dk cPpk gSA ge vkSj gekjh csVh ;g cPpk fxjokuk pkgrs gSA gesa ;g Hkh crk fn;k x;k gS fd bl dk;Z esa ejht dks rdyhQ gksxh vkSj fdlh tfVyrk gksus ij ;k vkijs'ku gksus dh fLFkfr esa [krjk Hkh gks ldrk gSA eq>s lkjs [krjs le>k fn;s x;s vkSj eatwj gSA yM+dh dh ftEesnkjh esjh gSA^^ 9. A close scrutiny of the medical report submitted by the experts including the Psychiatrist does not leave us in any doubt that the petitioner having been subjected to physical violation and sexual abuse which led to her rape, has continuously been undergoing mental trauma and agony and she is found troubled by the mere fact that she is carrying an unwanted pregnancy. The Psychiatrist in his report has clearly stated that the petitioner is talking less and her appetite has been reduced and further that teenage pregnancy in itself has psychological effects on the girl and that the petitioner is not mature enough to physically and mentally handle the stress of pregnancy, the child birth and later on taking care of the offspring, especially the unwanted one. The opinion expressed by the Head of Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Department of Pediatrics of the Medical University is also worth being noticed, according to which continuation of pregnancy cause mental trauma to the minor girl. The medical experts have also opined that the petitioner is in the stage of advanced pregnancy of 22+ weeks, however, termination of pregnancy can be attempted medically, initially using medications which procedure may take around 2-3 days for completion and if pregnancy is not terminated medically, then surgical termination will be done by hysterotomy which involves anaesthesia and surgery as any other surgical procedure. No significant anomaly in fetus or no substantial risk to the petitioner can be gathered from the medical report if she gives birth. 10. The Court in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case is called upon to reflect appropriately as to what would serve the best interest of a minor, who is obviously suffering from ''Rape Trauma Syndrome' not only at present but would suffer in her further life as well. 11. Termination of pregnancy in our society is governed by Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as ''MTP Act'). Section 3 of the said Act permits medical termination of pregnancy where length of pregnancy does not exceed 12 weeks, if continuance of pregnancy would not involve a risk to the life of pregnant woman or of grave injury to her physical or mental health in the opinion of one registered medical practitioner. It also permits termination of pregnancy, length of which exceeds 12 weeks but does not exceed 20 weeks, if such an opinion in good faith is formed by two medical practitioners. Section 3 contains an Explanation which provides for statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health of a pregnant woman in case pregnancy is alleged by the woman to have been caused by rape. Section 3 contains an Explanation which provides for statutory presumption of grave injury to mental health of a pregnant woman in case pregnancy is alleged by the woman to have been caused by rape. According to Explanation-1 appended to Section 3, in such a situation anguish caused by such pregnancy is presumed to constitute grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. The statutory prescription thus available in Section 3 of MTP Act lays maximum emphasis on involvement of risk to life of the pregnant woman or risk of grave injury to her physical or mental health, apart from emphasis on the risk that if child was born, it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities which would render the child to be seriously handicapped. 12. The provision contained in Section 3 thus does not limit itself to injury to physical health of a pregnant woman on account of continuance of pregnancy, it rather encompasses within its fold injury to mental health as well. 13. We may also refer to Section 5 of MTP Act which is an exception to Section 3 of the Act. Section 5 permits termination of pregnancy even where length of such pregnancy exceeds the limit as prescribed in Section 3. According to Section 5, the pregnancy can be terminated in such a situation as well, in case in the opinion of the medical practitioner, to be formed in good faith, it is found that termination of such pregnancy is immediately necessary to save the life of pregnant woman. 14. Learned Senior Advocate Sri J.N. Mathur and Ms. Bulbul Godiyal in their submissions have stated that it is not only the physical health rather the mental health of the pregnant woman as well which is to be given due regard while expressing any opinion about necessity of terminating the pregnancy. Learned Senior Advocates have also drawn attention of the Court to the statutory presumption contained in Explanation-I appended to Section 3 of the MTP Act which, as observed above, contains a presumption regarding a pregnancy caused by rape to constitute in itself a grave injury to the mental health of the pregnant woman. 15. Discussing the said legal presumption, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Z Vs. 15. Discussing the said legal presumption, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Z Vs. State of Bihar and others, 2018 11 SCC 572 has observed that once such statutory presumption is provided, the same comes within the compartment of grave injury to mental health. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case has further observed that an opinion by the registered medical practitioner is required to be formed that continuance of pregnancy would involve grave mental and physical harm to her. The said case pertains to a woman who was in a "Women Rehabilitation Center" and had given consent for termination of pregnancy alleging about rape committed on her, however termination was not carried out. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the facts of the said case found non termination of pregnancy to constitute negligence in carrying out the statutory duty. Paragraph 27 of the said judgment is extracted herein below:- 27. Thus, the opinion has to be formed by the registered practitioners as per the Act and they are required to form an opinion that continuance of pregnancy would involve a grave mental or physical harm to her. We have already referred to Explanation 1 which includes allegation of rape. As is perceivable, the appellant had gone from a women rehabilitation centre, had given consent for termination of pregnancy and had alleged about rape committed on her, but the termination was not carried out. In such a circumstance, we are obliged to hold that there has been negligence in carrying out the statutory duty, as a result of which, the appellant has been constrained to suffer grave mental injury. 16. In a case like the one we are dealing with at the moment, best interest of the victim is what the Court is expected to consider in its capacity of ''parens patriae'. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Z Vs. State of Bihar and others (supra) has extracted certain observations made by another Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suchita Srivastava (supra), which are reproduced herein below:- "As evident from its literal description, the "best interests" test requires the Court to ascertain the course of action which would serve the best interests of the person in question. In the present setting this means that the Court must undertake a careful inquiry of the medical opinion on the feasibility of the pregnancy as well as social circumstances faced by the victim. It is important to note that the Court's decision should be guided by the interests of the victim alone and not those of the other stakeholders such as guardians or the society in general. It is evident that the woman in question will need care and assistance which will in turn entail some costs. However, that cannot be a ground for denying the exercise of reproductive rights." 17. Thus, as mandated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suchita Srivastava (supra), the ''best interests' test requires the Court to ascertain the course of action which would serve the best interests of the person in question. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case, facts of which can be said to be some what similar to the facts of the present case, had opined that taking care of the best interest of the person in question would require the Court to undertake a careful inquiry of the medial opinion not only on the feasibility of the pregnancy but also on the social circumstances faced by the victim. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further goes on to observe that the Court's decision in such matter should be guided by the interest of the victim alone and not those of the other stakeholders, such as guardians or the society in general. 18. We thus now advert to the medical opinion submitted by the Medical Board constituted under the Court's order dated 16.07.2019. The extract of the opinion recorded by the Psychiatrist as member of the Medical Board has been reproduced in one of the preceding paragraphs of this order. The report of the Medical Board has also been reproduced above. A careful scrutiny of the medical report leads us to draw the conclusion that continuance of pregnancy by the victim, who is a minor aged about only sixteen years, would not be in her best interest keeping in view the opinion expressed by the Psychiatrist that the victim is neither mature physically nor mentally to handle the stress of pregnancy, child birth and later on taking care of offspring which is unwanted. 19. 19. Even other two doctors forming part of the Medical Board have clearly stated that continuance of pregnancy will definitely cause mental trauma to the minor girl. 20. Having regard to the aforesaid medical opinion expressed by the Medical Board and also considering the Explanation-I appended to Section 3 of the MTP Act that any pregnancy caused by rape would result in anguish caused by such pregnancy and that shall be presumed to constitute a grave injury to the mental health of the victim, we are of the opinion that the petitioner may be permitted to get the pregnancy terminated. While arriving at this conclusion, we have given due regard to the provision of Sections 3 & 5 of the MTP Act which permit termination of pregnancy, not only if its continuance involves grave injury to physical health of the woman but also injury to mental health as well. 21. We would also like to refer to sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the MTP Act, which contains a statutory mandate that in determining whether continuance of pregnancy would involve risk of injury to health as mentioned in sub-section (2), account will have to be taken of the pregnant woman's actual or reasonably foreseeable environment. 22. As per the averments made in the writ petition, parents of the petitioner cannot be said to be well off. Father of the petitioner is said to be earning the bread and butter for the family working as a labourer. Giving birth to a child by victim of rape that too at such a tender age, may make the future life of the victim more miserable. The environment which the petitioner in this case would be landing herself in, if she gives birth to the child, can very well be foreseen as completely non-conducive to the future growth of the petitioner as a human being hampering all chances of a normal and happy life. 23. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the discussions made above, we provide that petitioner be permitted to get the pregnancy terminated. 24. 23. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the discussions made above, we provide that petitioner be permitted to get the pregnancy terminated. 24. Since the petitioner hails from poor financial background, we request the Vice-Chancellor of the King George's Medical University that all the medical facilities required for getting pregnancy of the petitioner terminated and for any treatment thereafter, shall be provided by the Medical University for which neither the petitioner nor her family members shall be charged. For the said purpose, the petitioner shall report to the Vice-Chancellor of the King George's Medical University at 5:00 pm today and accordingly she will be hospitalized and given due care in the hospital. 25. The doctors who will be attending her shall show utmost sensitivity at their command to the situation she has been fallen in. The doctors attending her in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the King George's Medical University shall adopt the procedure which may be warranted for termination of the pregnancy. 26. During the period the petitioner is subjected to medical or surgical or any other treatment, she shall remain hospitalized and shall be discharged from the hospital only once she is found medially fit. We also direct that entire expenses of hospitalization and other medical care including medicines and any other paraphernalia required, shall be borne by the King George's Medical University. 27. An application has been moved by one Suresh Srivastava, who is said to be the accused named in the First Information Report seeking impleadment in the matter. So far as to the issue raised in this application is concerned, we do not find any reason to permit the applicant to be impleaded or even to be permitted to address the Court in this matter. 28. The application is thus rejected. 29. However, we may take notice of the concerns expressed in this application and accordingly we direct the authorities of the hospital in the King George's Medical University that they shall take necessary tissues from the fetus which shall be preserved and shall be handed over to the Investigating Officer as and when he makes any such request. 30. Sri Abhinav N. Trivedi will communicate this order to the Vice Chancellor of the King George's Medical University forthwith without waiting for its certified copy. 31. 30. Sri Abhinav N. Trivedi will communicate this order to the Vice Chancellor of the King George's Medical University forthwith without waiting for its certified copy. 31. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the learned Government Advocate, to the Amicus Curiae appointed by the Court Sri J.N. Mathur and Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, Senior Advocates and also to Sri Abhinav N Trivedi free of charge. 32. At this juncture, Ms. Bulbul Godiyal, learned Senior Advocate has stated that there is a scheme framed by the State as mandated by Section 357-A of the Criminal Procedure Code and some directions may be issued for appropriately compensating the victim-petitioner. 33. Learned State Counsel in this regard shall have complete instructions as to how much compensation can be paid by the State to the petitioner in this case and in which scheme such compensation is payable. The said instructions shall be sought by the learned Standing Counsel by the next date. List this case on 07th August 2019, as fresh.