As per the case facts, a minor, approximately fourteen years old, became pregnant due to alleged sexual assault and sought permission to terminate her pregnancy at 25 weeks. The High ... Court denied this permission, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court. The question arose regarding the interpretation of the MTP Act concerning termination of pregnancy for minors, particularly when there is a divergence of opinion between the pregnant person and their guardian, and how medical boards should evaluate such cases. Finally, the Supreme Court held that the MTP Act protects registered medical practitioners and medical boards when they form a good faith opinion on pregnancy termination. The medical board's opinion must not be limited to Section 3(2-B) criteria but must also evaluate the pregnant person's physical and emotional well-being. For clarificatory opinions, sound reasons for any change must be provided. Crucially, the consent of the pregnant person is paramount in reproductive autonomy decisions, and in cases involving minors or mentally ill pregnant persons, their opinion must be a significant factor for the court to reach a just conclusion. The appeal was disposed of with these conclusions.