Supreme Court Allows Passive Euthanasia For Coma Patient Harish Rana In Landmark Ruling
The Supreme Court permitted passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, who has been in a vegetative state since 2013, clarifying that clinically assisted nutrition counts as medical treatment that can be withdrawn under certain conditions.
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has allowed passive euthanasia for 32-year-old Harish Rana, who has been in a coma for more than a decade after suffering severe brain injuries in a fall.
A bench comprising Justices J. B. Pardiwala and K. V. Viswanathan permitted Rana’s parents to withdraw life-sustaining medical support, marking the first case in India where passive euthanasia has been authorised through a direct court order.
Rana sustained critical head injuries in 2013 after falling from the fourth floor of his home while he was a student. Since then, he has remained in a persistent vegetative state with no signs of recovery, relying entirely on medical support for survival.
While delivering the verdict, the court emphasised that the crucial question in such cases is not whether death is in the patient’s best interest but whether continuing life-sustaining treatment actually benefits the patient.
The bench clarified that clinically assisted nutrition should be considered a form of medical treatment. Therefore, it can be withdrawn if medical boards examining the patient conclude that there is no meaningful chance of recovery and recommend discontinuing treatment.
The decision relied on legal principles established in the 2018 ruling in the Common Cause vs Union of India case, in which the Supreme Court recognised the right to die with dignity as part of the fundamental right to life guaranteed under the Constitution.
The court also stressed that two conditions must be met before withdrawing life-support: the intervention must qualify as medical treatment and the decision must be guided strictly by the patient’s best interests.
Rana’s parents approached the Supreme Court seeking permission for passive euthanasia after 13 years of treatment failed to improve his condition. Medical reports submitted to the court confirmed that his condition had remained unchanged since the accident.
The ruling is expected to serve as an important legal reference for future cases involving passive euthanasia and end-of-life medical decisions in India.
Next Story
