Today, On 11th March, In a historic first, the Supreme Court has allowed passive euthanasia, permitting withdrawal of life support for 31-year-old Harish Rana, who has remained in a vegetative state since a 2013 fall from a building for many years.
A Supreme Court bench permitted a plea to discontinue life support for 31-year-old Harish Rana, who has been in a persistent vegetative state since a 2013 fall from a building.
Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan noted that Rana has not responded to treatment.
The Bench observed,
“He experiences sleep–wake cycles but exhibits no meaningful interaction and has been dependent on others for all activities of self-care. Harish has been on CAN administered through a PEG tube, and his condition has shown no improvement,”
Accordingly, the court held that the medical board may, using its clinical judgment, decide on withdrawal of treatment in line with the guidelines established by the Supreme Court in its 2018 Common Cause v. Union of India ruling.
The judgment stated,
“In line with our considered view, it would be permissible for the medical board to exercise its clinical judgment regarding the withdrawal of treatment in accordance with the guidelines laid down in Common Cause v. Union of India,”
This may be the first time the Court has issued such an order in an individual case since the 2018 decision, which authorized passive euthanasia and recognized living wills/advance directives.
That five-judge Constitution Bench had held that the right to life under Article 21 encompasses the right to live with dignity, which extends to “smoothening the process of dying” for terminally ill patients or those in a persistent vegetative state with no prospect of recovery.
Rana, now about 31, suffered a catastrophic brain injury in August 2013 after falling from the fourth floor of his paying-guest accommodation while studying for a BTech in Chandigarh. He has remained in a permanent vegetative state since then.
His family petitioned the courts to allow withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration (CANH), which is being provided via a PEG tube. They had earlier sought a Medical Board from the Delhi High Court to evaluate whether life-sustaining treatment could be stopped under the Supreme Court’s Common Cause guidelines.
The High Court refused, finding that Rana was not on mechanical ventilation and could sustain himself without external aid, and therefore was not terminally ill so passive euthanasia did not apply.
The parents appealed to the Supreme Court in 2024, requesting formation of a Primary Medical Board.
The top court initially declined that relief but allowed the family to return if further directions were needed. As Rana’s condition persisted with no improvement, his father filed the present petition asking for withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment.
After prolonged hearings, the Court reserved its judgment on January 15 and has now issued the current order.
Passive Euthanasia in India
Euthanasia refers to the intentional ending of life to relieve suffering from an incurable condition. In India, it is classified into two types:
- Active Euthanasia: Causing death through drugs or injections (illegal in India)
- Passive Euthanasia: Withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatment (legal under strict guidelines)
The legal recognition of passive euthanasia began with the Aruna Shanbaug case (2011). Aruna, a Mumbai nurse, remained in a vegetative state for 42 years following a sexual assault before passing away in 2015.
In 2018, the Supreme Court, in Common Cause vs Union of India, ruled that the right to die with dignity is an intrinsic part of Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Constitution.
Case Title: Harish Rana v. Union of India & Ors., MA 2238/2025 in SLP(C) No. 18225/2024
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Passive Euthanasia
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
