Justice JB Pardiwala Gets Emotional While Delivering Harish Rana Passive Euthanasia Verdict
Justice JB Pardiwala became emotional while delivering the Supreme Court’s landmark verdict allowing passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, a man who has remained in a vegetative state for 13 years.
An emotional moment unfolded inside the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday when Justice J. B. Pardiwala briefly teared up while delivering a landmark verdict allowing passive euthanasia for 32-year-old Harish Rana, who has been in a persistent vegetative state for over a decade.
A bench comprising Justices J. B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan permitted Rana’s parents to withdraw life-sustaining treatment. The court emphasised that the crucial question in such cases is not whether death serves a patient’s best interest, but whether continuing life-sustaining treatment actually benefits the patient.
During the reading of the judgment, Justice Pardiwala reflected on Rana’s life before the accident, describing him as “a bright young boy” pursuing his studies before suffering severe brain injuries in a fall 13 years ago. The judge became visibly emotional while recounting the circumstances of the case.
Medical reports presented before the court showed that Rana experiences sleep-wake cycles but has no meaningful interaction with his surroundings and remains entirely dependent on others for daily care.
The bench noted that Rana had been receiving clinically assisted nutrition through a PEG tube and that his condition had shown no improvement over the years.
The ruling also clarified that clinically administered nutrition qualifies as medical treatment. Therefore, it may be withdrawn if a medical board determines that there is no meaningful chance of recovery and recommends discontinuing life support.
The judgment relied on legal principles laid down in the landmark Common Cause vs Union of India ruling, which recognised the right to die with dignity as part of the fundamental right to life under the Constitution.
The case has drawn nationwide attention to ethical and legal questions surrounding passive euthanasia and end-of-life medical decisions in India, with the verdict expected to guide future cases involving withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.
Next Story
