SC says this is not a case of passive euthanasia, as the patient, comatose after a multi-storey fall, is not dependent on any external device for life support. | Photo Credit: Shashi Shekhar Kashyap
The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to grant an aged couple’s plea to allow “passive euthanasia” for their 30-year-old son, who has been lying comatose at home for 11 years after a fall from the fourth floor of a building.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud was visibly moved by the plight of the parents, who said they had exhausted both their savings and willpower taking care of their son.
“This is a very, very hard case,” Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
Not ‘passive’ euthanasia
The Chief Justice said that the man, Harish Rana, who had sustained extensive head injuries in the fall in 2013, was not on a ventilator or any kind of life support. He was still taking in nutrition through a food pipe. Letting him go would not amount to passive euthanasia, as he was not dependent on any external device to stay alive.
Passive euthanasia is the intentional act of letting a patient die by withholding or withdrawing life support or treatment necessary for maintaining life.
“In this case, it would amount to active euthanasia, which is not legal,” the Bench told the parents’ counsel.
The couple had moved the top court after the Delhi High Court had refused to constitute a medical board to consider their plea for euthanising their son.
“The High Court was right. No doctor would agree to do that,” the Chief Justice said.
Patient care support
The court sought the aid of Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati to explore the possibility of shifting the patient to a government hospital or some other similar place for treatment and care.
“The court is mindful that the parents are now aged and cannot care for their son who is bedridden for so many years and if any humanitarian solution can be found other than passive euthanasia,” the court recorded in the order.
