The Rajasthan High Court recently parses the commendable gesture of Advocate Shreyansh Mardia, who volunteered to bear the entire cost of child delivery for a minor rape victim.

Mardia stepped in to offer this support after the State argued that it could not be compelled to finance the victim's delivery expenses.

A Bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta observed,

"On Court’s request, Mr. Shreyansh Mardia, Advocate has volunteered to bear all the expenses relating to the delivery of the victim. In light of the gesture showed by Mr. Shreyansh Mardia, Advocate, no direction for bearing the delivery expenses is required to be given to the State."

The Court further instructed the Child Welfare Committee to offer counseling and assistance to the minor victim and her parents, particularly concerning the adoption process, should they choose to pursue it. Additionally, the Committee was granted the discretion to assume custody of the newborn child if deemed necessary.

The Court was deliberating on an application submitted by the father of a minor pregnant rape victim. Previously, the Court had granted permission to terminate the pregnancy, but by the time the victim was taken to the hospital for the procedure, she was already 29 weeks pregnant. At this advanced stage, abortion posed significant health risks to the victim, leading the family to opt for childbirth and explore adoption options. Consequently, they filed an application requesting financial assistance from the State government to cover the expenses related to the delivery and to facilitate the adoption process.

In support of their request, the applicant cited the Supreme Court's judgment in *X v. State of Maharashtra*, dated April 29, 2024. Advocate Priyanka Borana, representing the applicant, argued that the State had a responsibility to cover the delivery expenses. While the State counsel did not object to recalling the earlier order for pregnancy termination, Additional Advocate General NS Rajpurohit contended that the State could not be directed to bear the medical costs for the delivery. In response, Advocate Shreyansh Mardia, who also represented the applicant, volunteered to cover all the delivery expenses. The Court acknowledged this offer and subsequently disposed of the plea.