Background: Foetal growth restriction (FGR) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Clinical methods for identifying women whose pregnancies are affected by FGR do not perform well. Despite this, the current approach to screening includes the clinical assessment of risk and thetargeted use of ultrasound. Objectives: To analyse the uteroplacental and fetoplacental blood flow using doppler ultrasound in FGR fetuses regarding UA and MCA flow velocity and waveform indices and compare the mode of delivery and perinatal outcomes in FGR pregnancy to normal and abnormal Doppler waveforms with those of pregnant women without FGR normal dopplers. Materials and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in collaboration with the Department of Radiology at Shadan Institute of Medical Sciences, Teaching Hospital and research centre, Hyderabad, from January 2019 to September 2019. A group of 100 cases were studied. Half of them (50 cases) comprised the study group, i.e., cases with FGR, 25 cases of which had abnormal doppler, and the remaining 25 cases of these 50 cases had FGR with normal doppler. The results in this study group were compared with 50 cases of normal pregnancies without FGR with normal doppler. Results: The operative delivery was 88% in abnormal doppler FGR, and 36% in normal doppler FGR, in contrast to 24% in the normal doppler non-FGR group. The mode of delivery was statistically significant among the groups with a p-value (<0.001). 64% of the abnormal doppler group had oligohydramnios compared to 36% in normal doppler with FGR versus 10% in the control group with a significant p-value (<0.001). The mean birth weight in FGR with abnormal doppler was 1.96±0.25kg compared to 1.94±0.16 kg in FGR with normal doppler and 3.06±0.31 kilograms in the control group, which had a significant p-value (<0.001). Conclusion: Abnormal UA and MCA indices are notably associated with operative abdominal deliveries, oligohydramnios, and low birth weight babies.