LawLoveLegal

In a sensitive and legally complex ruling, the Bombay High Court has refused permission to terminate a 28-week pregnancy , holding that doing so would amount to foeticide as the foetus is healthy, viable, and capable of independent life . The decision underscores how reproductive autonomy, statutory limits, and foetal rights intersect under Indian constitutional law . The Case in Brief The petition was filed by the mother of an 18-year-old girl , seeking termination of pregnancy that arose from a relationship when the girl was 17 years old . The plea stated that: The relationship involved a promise of marriage An FIR was registered on January 2 after the pregnancy was discovered The teen did not wish to continue the pregnancy Despite acknowledging the personal hardship involved, the Court refused to permit medical termination at this advanced stage. What the Medical Board Found The High Court relied heavily on the medical board’s opinion , which stated that: The pregnancy was at 28 w...

Background of the Case A division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the September 23, 2025 order passed by Justice Jagmohan Bansal concerning disciplinary action against police personnel sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month. The division bench, comprising Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor, stayed the single judge’s ruling on November 13, 2025, during the hearing of an appeal filed by the state government. The stay has been confirmed by Haryana Additional Advocate General, Sanjeev Kaushik. The matter will next be taken up on January 28, 2026. Challenge to Interpretation of Rule 16.2(2) and Rule 16.28 of the Punjab Police Rules The Single Judge’s Findings Justice Jagmohan Bansal had held that: The government cannot impose any punishment other than dismissal where an enrolled police officer is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment exceeding one month, as per Rule 16.2(2) of the Punjab Police Rules (PPR), 1934 (applicable in...