PASSIVE EUTHANASIA IN INDIA: A CASE ANALYSIS OF RECENT JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS

Abstract

Indian constitutional jurisprudence has marked a substantial change with the legal recognition of passive euthanasia. The recognition of passive euthanasia is a remarkable step in translating judicial doctrines into a real-world application, result of judicial interpretation rather than comprehensive legislation. Passive euthanasia is such a complicated issue where one of the most complex intersections of law, ethics, medicine and human rights takes place. Passive euthanasia maintains an equilibrium between the sanctity of life and dignity of death. There has been an intense debate in the constitutional history on the question whether right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India includes right to die with dignity. This paper evaluates the latest case of Harish Rana v. Union of India 2026, a case in which Supreme Court of India for the very first-time authorized withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for a patient in a permanent vegetative state and further expanded the scope of passive euthanasia. This case represents the first practical enforcement of the right to die with dignity under Article 21 of the constitution of India. The researcher adopts a doctrinal methodology to analyze the fundamental constitutional principles, judicial interpretation, and effect of the decision, arguing that it strengthens the right to die with dignity while emphasizing on the necessity of comprehensive legislation.