Passive euthanasia case: SC weighs father’s plea to withdraw life support of patient

New Delhi: The Supreme Court reviewed a report submitted by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) on Harish Rana, a 32-year-old man who was a student of Punjab University and fell off the fourth floor of a paying guest accommodation in 2013, suffering serious injuries. He has been in a vegetative state for 12 years and is the subject of a plea seeking permission for passive euthanasia.

A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan said they would like to speak to the man’s parents in person on January 13 before taking a final decision. The court also directed counsel to study the AIIMS report and assist it in passing final orders.

The case arises from an application filed by the man’s father, seeking withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment. Under the Supreme Court’s 2018 Constitution Bench ruling in 'Common Cause', as modified in January 2023, opinions from both primary and secondary medical boards are required before passive euthanasia can be permitted.

A primary medical board had earlier reported that the chances of recovery were negligible. It noted that the patient remains bedridden, requires a tracheostomy for respiration and a gastrostomy for feeding, and has developed severe bedsores.

Pursuant to the court’s directions, a secondary medical board constituted by AIIMS examined the patient and submitted its report on December 16. Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati informed the court that the report had been received. After perusing it, Justice Pardiwala described it as a very sad report.

As copies of the report had not yet been shared with the parties, the court directed the registry to provide them to the petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Rashmi Nandakumar, and to the ASG. The Bench said it had reached a stage where a final decision would have to be taken and sought detailed assistance from both sides.

Accepting the ASG’s submission that the family must be consulted before any order is passed, the court said it would personally interact with the parents, adding that an online meeting would not be appropriate in such a matter. It directed the parents to remain present before the court on January 13 at 3 pm.

The court also asked both counsel to jointly speak to the parents and other family members and submit a report, and to place their submissions in writing. Copies of the primary medical board’s report were also ordered to be furnished.

The father had earlier approached the Supreme Court in 2024 seeking passive euthanasia, but the plea was declined. At that time, the Uttar Pradesh government agreed to bear the cost of treatment. The present application states that the man’s condition has since deteriorated and that he is no longer responding to treatment.