The Supreme Court on Thursday said it would consider permitting the withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment for 32-year-old Harish Rana, who has remained in a permanent vegetative state for the past 13 years, after reserving its order on a plea seeking passive euthanasia filed by his parents. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan described the matter as a “delicate issue” after personally meeting Harish’s parents before the hearing.
“These issues are delicate. We are also mortals. Who are we to decide who lives or dies? We will consider withdrawing life-sustaining medical treatment,” the court observed after hearing detailed submissions from the amicus curiae representing Harish’s parents and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati for the Centre.
Harish, a resident of Delhi’s Mahavir Enclave, had left home in his teens to pursue college education in Chandigarh. On August 20, 2013, he fell from the fourth-floor balcony of his PG accommodation, suffering severe head injuries that resulted in 100 per cent disability. Since then, he has remained in a permanent vegetative state, fully dependent on medical support, including tubes for breathing and nutrition.
During the hearing, the amicus curiae sought permission for passive euthanasia, describing it as a case of allowing a natural death to take its course. Referring to reports of two medical boards, the amicus said Harish’s chances of recovery were negligible and argued that the continuation of invasive life-sustaining treatment violated his right to live with dignity.
Explaining the process of passive euthanasia, the amicus told the court that Harish would be placed under palliative care, with feeding tubes withdrawn and no further medical intervention undertaken. Sedatives would be administered to ensure he remains comfortable and does not experience pain until death.
While active euthanasia remains illegal in India, passive euthanasia was first recognised by the Supreme Court in 2011 in the Aruna Shanbaug case. Shanbaug, a nurse at Mumbai’s KEM Hospital, had been in a vegetative state for over four decades following a sexual assault in 1973. Although the court approved euthanasia in principle, she eventually died of pneumonia in 2015. In 2018, the Supreme Court formally legalised passive euthanasia and laid down guidelines governing the process.
Supporting the plea, ASG Aishwarya Bhati agreed that passive euthanasia was warranted in Harish’s case and noted that this would be the first instance where the Supreme Court’s guidelines on the subject could be implemented. She emphasised that death should result from the underlying medical condition and not directly from the act of withdrawing treatment.
The ASG also urged the court to frame clearer guidelines that take into account the views and hardships of caregivers of terminally ill patients, pointing to the prolonged emotional, physical and legal ordeal faced by Harish’s parents. She highlighted that Harish has been in an irreversible vegetative state for over a decade and described his condition as extremely frail.
After hearing all sides, the Supreme Court reserved its judgment, which is expected to have significant implications for the application of passive euthanasia guidelines in India.
