Rashmi Arya v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC8 May 2026W.P.(C)/6045/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Termination of pregnancy; medical board opinion; severe IUGR/FGR; guarded fetal prognosis; previous Cesarean section; risk of uterine rupture and preterm Cesarean section; antenatal follow-up at AIIMS; petition disposed on petitioner accepting medical report; directions to respondent no.3 (Union) re steps taken since 06.05.2026 and affidavit explaining deficient examination; listing on 13.05.2026; Rashmi Arya v. Union of India; Delhi High Court; Writ Petition (Civil); Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of on the petitioner's acceptance of the medical board report; directions issued to respondent no.3 to record steps taken since 06.05.2026, to explain (by affidavit) the deficient examination, with the matter listed for 13.05.2026. ¶¶19

Rashmi Arya Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition should be disposed of in view of the medical board's opinion (not suggesting termination of pregnancy) once the report is read over and found agreeable to the petitioner. +1 more

¶¶19

Court's answer

The Court disposed of the petition because the medical board did not suggest termination of pregnancy and its justification, read over to counsel, was agreeable to the petitioner.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no.3 was directed to place on record the steps taken pursuant to the Court's observations made on 06.05.2026.

¶¶20

Key takeaways

Respondent No.3 was called upon to explain why the petitioner's examination had not taken place in the desired manner, by affidavit before the next date of hearing; depending on the explanation, the Court would consider passing appropriate order; the matter was listed for 13.05.2026.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.), order dated 08.05.2026 in W.P.(C) 6045/2026 (Rashmi Arya v. Union of India & Ors.): After detailed medical examination, the medical board did not suggest termination of the petitioner's pregnancy, citing severe IUGR/FGR with guarded fetal prognosis, a previous Cesarean section, and the risks of failed medical termination, uterine rupture and preterm Cesarean section affecting future reproductive outcomes; weekly scans and antenatal follow-up at AIIMS or a hospital of choice were advised, and the parents agreed. The report was read over to counsel for the petitioner and, being agreeable to her, the petition was disposed of. Separately, the Court directed respondent no.3 to place on record the steps taken pursuant to the Court's observations of 06.05.2026 and to explain, by affidavit before the next date, why the petitioner's examination had not taken place in the desired manner; a copy of the report was furnished to the CGSC for onward transmission to respondent no.3, and the matter was listed for 13.05.2026.

¶1

$~53

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6045/2026

¶3

RASHMI ARYA .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, Ms. Yashmita Pandey, Ms. Mallika Agarwal, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents

¶7

Through: Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, Adv. (CGSC) Ms. Usha Jamnal, ⁠Ms. Nyasa Sharma, ⁠Mr. Ankit Khatri, Advocates for R-1.

¶8

Mr. V. S. R. Krishna and Mr. V Shashank Kumar, Advocates for R- 4/AIIMS.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 08.05.2026

¶11

In terms of the detailed medical examination of the petitioner, the medical board has not suggested for termination of pregnancy. The justification for the said decision is extracted as under:-

¶12

“Considering severe IUGR in the fetus, it is understandable that the fetus has a guarded prognosis. As per the investigation, presently there is no obvious genetic cause for the FGR. It is expected that in its natural course, there is a high probability that the fetus may have an intrauterine demise in the coming few weeks.

¶13

Termination of pregnancy is detrimental for the mother at this gestation. She has a previous Cesarean section which presents a challenging situation for the mother. This involves a failure of medical termination,

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/05/2026 at 12:33:18

¶16

risk of uterine rupture and preterm Cesarean section which will have implication on the future reproductive outcomes.

¶17

On the other hand, if natural course is followed, the uterus is more likely to respond to induction of labour. It is to be emphasized that intrauterine fetal demise does not put the mother in any immediate jeopardy.

¶18

It is advisable to follow up weekly with regular scans and antenatal visits at AIIMS or their choice of hospital. The same has been discussed in detail with the parents and they are willing for the same.”

¶19

The said report is read over by learned counsel for the petitioner. Since, the aforesaid justification is agreeable to the petitioner, therefore, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶20

The Court, however, directs respondent no.3 to place on record the steps, which have been taken pursuant to the observations made by the Court on 06.05.2026.

¶21

Let a copy of the present report be also furnished to Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC for onwards transmission to respondent no.3.

¶22

The respondent No.3 to explain why the examination of the petitioner had not taken place in the desired manner. Depending upon the same, Court shall consider to pass appropriate order.

¶23

Let an affidavit qua the aforesaid aspect be filed before the next date of hearing.

¶24

For the aforesaid limited purpose, list this matter on 13.05.2026.

¶25

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶26

MAY 8, 2026 Nc

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 12/05/2026 at 12:33:18

Rashmi Arya v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashmi Arya v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navendu Agrawal Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Rwa Block C4A Janakpuri Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

M/S Aerotech Fms Pvt. Ltd. (through Director Gurbir Singh Nagi) Vs Cbic & Ors.

Vandana Bansal Vs Municipal Corporation Delhi & Ors.

Kamant Chaudhary & Ors. Vs Faculty of Law, University of Delhi through Its Dean & Anr.

Staff Selection Commission Vs Hari Mohan Sharma

Yatish Kumar Vs I.I.T.

Davinder Singh Sapra Vs Decent Securities Pvt. Ltd.

Acromax Industries Private Limited. Vs Government E Marketplace. (Gem) & Anr.

Bheem Kumar Vs Department of Revenue Govt. of NCT Delhi

M/S Bloom Jindal Jv in Association With Kapil Muni Infra Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited

Bhoomi Chatter Singh Rachhoya Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Utkarsh Jain Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Limited Vs Ansal Hi Tech Townships Limited & Anr.