Prelims: Current events of national and international importance | Polity & Governance
Why in News?
The SC re-examines the Harish Rana case, recalling India’s law on euthanasia and landmark cases.
- Euthanasia – Euthanasia, from Greek for "good death," is the practice of intentionally ending a person's life to relieve suffering from an incurable condition, often called "mercy killing".
- Types
- Active euthanasia means directly causing death (e.g., giving a lethal injection).
- Passive euthanasia means allowing death by withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment (e.g., stopping ventilator support).
- Legal Status – Passive euthanasia is legally recognised and regulated by the Supreme Court for terminally ill patients, whereas active euthanasia remains illegal, as it requires legislative action.
|
Aspect
|
Assisted Dying
|
Withholding treatment
|
|
Nature
|
Active act (commission)
|
Passive omission
|
|
Intention
|
To cause death
|
No intention to cause death
|
|
Liability
|
Murder / culpable homicide/abetment
|
No criminal Liability
|
|
Constitutional Basis
|
Not Protected
|
Protected under Art. 21 (dignity in death)
|
|
Cause of Death
|
Direct act of killing
|
Underlying disease/injury
|
|
Safeguards
|
None
|
Medical boards, family consent, SC guidelines
|
- Harish Rana Case Context – Harish Rana, 32, has been in a vegetative state for over a decade after a severe accident. His parents approached the SC seeking passive euthanasia.
- The Court described his condition as “pathetic” and ordered medical boards to assess whether life-sustaining treatment could be withdrawn.
- SC’s Position – The Court reaffirmed that Article 21 (Right to Life) does not include a general “right to die.”
- However, it does protect the right to live with dignity, which extends to the process of dying when life is “ebbing out.”
Judicial Journey of Euthanasia in India
- Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996) – The Supreme Court has said Article 21 does not include a general “right to die.” Suicide and assisted suicide remain outside constitutional protection.
- Aruna Shanbaug case, 2011 – It reaffirmed the Gian Kaur case, that no right to die, but right to live with dignity may include dignified death in limited cases.
- The SC allowed passive euthanasia under strict safeguards.
- Court’s interim guidelines – Any decision to withdraw life support had to be taken by family/next friend/doctors in the patient’s best interest, but implementation required approval from the High Court.
- Common Cause case, 2018 – The Constitution Bench recognised passive euthanasia and legalised living wills, that competent adults can record a refusal/withdrawal of treatment in advance.
- SC Modification (2023) – The SC relaxed procedural requirements to make living wills more workable.
Reference
Indian Express | SC re-examines Harish Rana case
