On August 28, 2024, the Court directed the J.J. Group of Hospitals and Grant Medical College in Mumbai to convene a Medical Board to assess the situation. This examination was to evaluate both the physical and emotional well-being of the minor, as well as the implications of either continuing or terminating the pregnancy.

The Medical Board submitted its report on September 2, 2024, highlighting key findings from interviews with the Petitioner and her mother. The report revealed that the mother, a widowed sole breadwinner with two other children, expressed concerns over the hardship of frequent travel to the hospital. Additionally, it noted that the pregnancy was unplanned, arising from a consensual relationship with a 22-year-old partner. Both the Petitioner and her partner were open to marriage and raising the child, with support from her mother.

Despite the pregnancy's unexpected nature, the Board noted the absence of congenital anomalies in the fetus. However, it raised concerns about the mental health of the minor, emphasizing that carrying the pregnancy to term could cause significant emotional distress. The Board recommended that the minor undergo stabilization and reevaluation before any medical procedure could be considered.

Following a thorough review of the Medical Board's report, the Court allowed the minor to terminate her pregnancy should she choose to do so. However, recognizing her expressed desire to continue with the pregnancy, the Court affirmed her autonomy in making this choice. The ruling fell within the framework of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, which emphasizes the rights of women and minors in such situations.

The Court issued several directives for the Petitioner’s care, including:

Medical Support: The Petitioner may opt for medical termination if desired, but must first undergo necessary stabilization and reassessment.

Post-Delivery Care: If the pregnancy proceeds, the K.E.M. Hospital will provide comprehensive post-delivery care, including neonatal support and counseling for the Petitioner, given her status as a victim of sexual abuse.

Legal Protections: The Court mandated that tissue and DNA samples be preserved for the investigation related to the sexual assault.

Adoption Considerations: Should the Petitioner wish to give the child up for adoption post-delivery, the State will facilitate this process.

The Court's ruling reflects a deep concern for the complexities faced by young women in such predicaments. It underscored the importance of support systems for victims of abuse, acknowledging the emotional and physical challenges they endure. The judges expressed distress over the societal and familial pressures that leave such individuals to navigate these significant life events largely alone.

In light of these considerations, the Court has appointed an amicus curiae, Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, to explore mechanisms for better support for young women facing unwanted pregnancies. The goal is to ensure that partners share accountability and involvement during such challenging times.

This case serves as a poignant reminder of the need for comprehensive support systems for vulnerable individuals, especially minors in situations of abuse. The Court's decision not only affirms the right to reproductive autonomy but also highlights the urgent need for societal changes to better support victims in navigating the complexities of pregnancy and parenthood. The matter is set for further consideration on September 20, 2024, as the Court seeks to develop a more effective framework for assisting women in similar circumstances.