<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> on Wednesday allowed the withdrawal of life support from Harish Rana, a 32-year old man who suffered a grievous injury in an accident in 2013 and has since been in a permanent vegetative state. <strong>Sumit Pande</strong> explains the apex court order permitting the first ever passive <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/euthanasia">euthanasia</a> in India.</p>.<p><strong>What was the petition before the SC?</strong></p>.<p>The elderly parents of Harish Rana had approached the SC seeking passive euthanasia for their comatose son. The Delhi High Court had rejected their petition on the grounds that the case didn’t qualify for passive euthanasia as per the guidelines laid down by the apex court. The HC felt that the patient was not on life support but was being fed through a feeding tube. In 2024, Harish's parents challenged this order before the SC. The apex court initially declined to grant relief, but allowed the petitioners to approach the courts again if they felt the need to do so.</p>.'Right to die with dignity': Supreme Court allows passive euthanasia for 32-year-old man in coma for 13 years.<p><strong>What is the legal status of euthanasia in India?</strong></p>.<p>Euthanasia, or painless killing of a terminally ill patient, was illegal in India for decades. Any attempt to inflict death on a patient on life support was deemed culpable homicide, inviting penal action. The Parliament has also not legislated on the issue. It was the 2011 landmark Supreme Court Judgement in the Aruna Shanbaug case that first dealt with the legal vacuum.</p>.<p><strong>What was the Aruna Shanbaug case?</strong></p>.<p>Aruna Shanbaug, then a 24-year-old nurse at Mumbai’s KEM Hospital, was assaulted by a ward boy in 1973, leading to severe brain injuries. She survived the attack but remained in a persistent vegetative state, nursed by her colleagues at the hospital. Journalist-activist Pinki Virani filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court in 2009 seeking that hospital staff stop feeding Aruna to let the patient “die peacefully”.</p>.Passive euthanasia is not the same as assisted suicide, the latter is a criminal offence in India.<p><strong>What did the court say in that case?</strong></p>.<p>In its judgment delivered in March 2011, an apex court bench headed by Justice Markandey Katju laid down a process and allowed high courts to pass a suitable order on an application filed by the kith and kin of patients seeking permission to withdraw the life support from a terminally ill or incapacitated person. The court said at least two judges must approve the petition based on the opinion of a panel of three reputable doctors.</p>.<p><strong>How did the 2018 order by a larger SC bench define euthanasia?</strong></p>.<p>The NGO Common Cause approached the Supreme Court pleading that terminally ill patients should not be subjected to cruel treatments. The five-member bench in its order recognised the right to die with dignity for terminally ill patients, allowing them to opt for passive euthanasia by executing a living will and refusing medical treatment, thereby leading to passive euthanasia. The apex court also mandated approvals from two different medical boards for all such cases.</p>.<p><strong>What is the difference between active and passive euthanasia?</strong></p>.<p>In active euthanasia, death is caused by medical intervention, such as administering a lethal injection. Passive euthanasia is an act of withdrawing treatment, including life support.</p>.Supreme Court urges Centre to enact comprehensive legislation on passive euthanasia.<p><strong>What were the changes in the SC euthanasia guidelines of 2023?</strong></p>.<p>In a 2023 order, the SC further modified its earlier guidelines to ease the process of passive euthanasia. The court simplified the procedure by allowing the attestation of the living will by a notary or a gazetted officer. The court also made a provision for an appeal before HCs in cases where the process was denied.</p>.<p><strong>What has the apex court said in the Harish Rana case?</strong></p>.<p>The two-member bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan, in its order, ruled that as per the guideline laid down in the 2018 judgement, the medical board could exercise its “clinical judgement” regarding withdrawal of life support, lauding Harish's parents for caring and never leaving their son.</p>.<p><strong>What is the euthanasia law in other countries?</strong></p>.<p>Countries like the Netherlands and Belgium allow for both active and passive euthanasia for patients who face “unbearable suffering". Australian law also permits both types of euthanasia for patients of sound mind, for terminally ill patients who may not survive more than a year.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> on Wednesday allowed the withdrawal of life support from Harish Rana, a 32-year old man who suffered a grievous injury in an accident in 2013 and has since been in a permanent vegetative state. <strong>Sumit Pande</strong> explains the apex court order permitting the first ever passive <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/euthanasia">euthanasia</a> in India.</p>.<p><strong>What was the petition before the SC?</strong></p>.<p>The elderly parents of Harish Rana had approached the SC seeking passive euthanasia for their comatose son. The Delhi High Court had rejected their petition on the grounds that the case didn’t qualify for passive euthanasia as per the guidelines laid down by the apex court. The HC felt that the patient was not on life support but was being fed through a feeding tube. In 2024, Harish's parents challenged this order before the SC. The apex court initially declined to grant relief, but allowed the petitioners to approach the courts again if they felt the need to do so.</p>.'Right to die with dignity': Supreme Court allows passive euthanasia for 32-year-old man in coma for 13 years.<p><strong>What is the legal status of euthanasia in India?</strong></p>.<p>Euthanasia, or painless killing of a terminally ill patient, was illegal in India for decades. Any attempt to inflict death on a patient on life support was deemed culpable homicide, inviting penal action. The Parliament has also not legislated on the issue. It was the 2011 landmark Supreme Court Judgement in the Aruna Shanbaug case that first dealt with the legal vacuum.</p>.<p><strong>What was the Aruna Shanbaug case?</strong></p>.<p>Aruna Shanbaug, then a 24-year-old nurse at Mumbai’s KEM Hospital, was assaulted by a ward boy in 1973, leading to severe brain injuries. She survived the attack but remained in a persistent vegetative state, nursed by her colleagues at the hospital. Journalist-activist Pinki Virani filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court in 2009 seeking that hospital staff stop feeding Aruna to let the patient “die peacefully”.</p>.Passive euthanasia is not the same as assisted suicide, the latter is a criminal offence in India.<p><strong>What did the court say in that case?</strong></p>.<p>In its judgment delivered in March 2011, an apex court bench headed by Justice Markandey Katju laid down a process and allowed high courts to pass a suitable order on an application filed by the kith and kin of patients seeking permission to withdraw the life support from a terminally ill or incapacitated person. The court said at least two judges must approve the petition based on the opinion of a panel of three reputable doctors.</p>.<p><strong>How did the 2018 order by a larger SC bench define euthanasia?</strong></p>.<p>The NGO Common Cause approached the Supreme Court pleading that terminally ill patients should not be subjected to cruel treatments. The five-member bench in its order recognised the right to die with dignity for terminally ill patients, allowing them to opt for passive euthanasia by executing a living will and refusing medical treatment, thereby leading to passive euthanasia. The apex court also mandated approvals from two different medical boards for all such cases.</p>.<p><strong>What is the difference between active and passive euthanasia?</strong></p>.<p>In active euthanasia, death is caused by medical intervention, such as administering a lethal injection. Passive euthanasia is an act of withdrawing treatment, including life support.</p>.Supreme Court urges Centre to enact comprehensive legislation on passive euthanasia.<p><strong>What were the changes in the SC euthanasia guidelines of 2023?</strong></p>.<p>In a 2023 order, the SC further modified its earlier guidelines to ease the process of passive euthanasia. The court simplified the procedure by allowing the attestation of the living will by a notary or a gazetted officer. The court also made a provision for an appeal before HCs in cases where the process was denied.</p>.<p><strong>What has the apex court said in the Harish Rana case?</strong></p>.<p>The two-member bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan, in its order, ruled that as per the guideline laid down in the 2018 judgement, the medical board could exercise its “clinical judgement” regarding withdrawal of life support, lauding Harish's parents for caring and never leaving their son.</p>.<p><strong>What is the euthanasia law in other countries?</strong></p>.<p>Countries like the Netherlands and Belgium allow for both active and passive euthanasia for patients who face “unbearable suffering". Australian law also permits both types of euthanasia for patients of sound mind, for terminally ill patients who may not survive more than a year.</p>