Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Constitutional LawSupreme Court of India

A (Mother of X) vs. State of Maharashtra

Not available · 2024 INSC 371Decided 29 Apr 2024
Not available

Background

A fourteen-year-old girl ("X"), allegedly a victim of sexual assault, discovered she was about 25 weeks pregnant only in March 2024 because she had irregular periods and no earlier signs. A Mumbai government hospital's medical board first found her fit for termination but later issued a contradictory "clarificatory" opinion denying it purely because the pregnancy exceeded 24 weeks. The Bombay High Court refused permission on that same ground, and the mother approached the Supreme Court.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court initially (22 April 2024) set aside the High Court's order and permitted termination after a fresh, more thorough medical board (Sion Hospital) found continuing the pregnancy would harm the minor's physical and mental well-being and that termination carried no greater risk than delivery at term. However, before the procedure was carried out, the minor and her parents changed their minds and, after detailed discussion with the medical team about the risks of intracardiac injection at this advanced stage, chose to continue the pregnancy to term. The Court accepted this choice, recalling its own earlier termination order, holding that a pregnant person's own consent is paramount and cannot be overridden even by a prior court order once the person no longer consents. The Court also laid down guidance that medical boards examining pregnancies beyond 24 weeks must assess the physical and mental health impact on the pregnant person, not simply reject termination on the ground of gestational age.

Lesson Learnt

In termination-of-pregnancy cases, the pregnant person's informed and current consent is paramount and can override even the family's or the court's own earlier decision; and medical boards evaluating late-term abortion requests must properly assess the woman's physical and mental health, not just count weeks.

A (Mother of X) vs. State of Maharashtra – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware