The Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step in a heart-wrenching case, directing the Noida district hospital to establish a primary medical board. This board will assess the possibility of permitting passive euthanasia for a 31-year-old man, Harish Rana, who has been in a persistent vegetative state for over ten years with 100% disability quadriplegia.
A Decade of Suffering and a Legal Plea
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan issued the directive on Wednesday. The order came in response to a fresh application filed by Rana's father, who pleaded that his son's health condition has deteriorated from bad to worse. The court, acknowledging the gravity of the situation, has asked the hospital in Sector 39, Noida, to submit its report within a strict timeframe of two weeks.
Passive euthanasia involves the intentional withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, allowing a patient with a terminal illness to die naturally. Justice Pardiwala, after reviewing the medical reports, remarked on the patient's condition, stating, "Just look at the condition of the boy. It's pathetic."
The Long Legal Battle for Mercy
This marks the second time in two years that the parents of Harish Rana have approached the top court seeking relief for their son. Rana's ordeal began in 2013 when he was a student at Punjab University. He suffered severe head injuries after a fall from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation, leaving him completely bedridden and dependent on an artificial support system for the past twelve years.
Advocate Rashmi Nandakumar, representing the father, informed the court that despite all efforts and assistance from the Uttar Pradesh government, the situation remains dire. "Today, what is happening is that he is falling ill quite often and has been taken to the hospital," she said. She clarified that the plea is not for active euthanasia but for passive euthanasia, as per the Supreme Court's 2018 judgment in the Common Cause case, which allows for the withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment under strict guidelines.
The legal journey has been complex. On August 20 last year, the Supreme Court had described the case as a "very hard one" and sought the Centre's response. Subsequently, on November 8, the court considered a Union Health Ministry report suggesting home care with state government support. However, the family has now returned to court, stating that home care is not a feasible solution to end their son's perpetual suffering.
Previous Hurdles in Lower Courts
The path to this point has been paved with legal denials. In July of the previous year, the Delhi High Court refused to refer Rana's case to a medical board. The High Court had reasoned that since Rana was not on a ventilator or other mechanical life-support and was surviving without external aid—being fed through a food pipe—his case did not meet the legal criteria for passive euthanasia. While expressing sympathy for the parents, who have even sold their house to sustain his treatment, the High Court stated it could not allow a "legally untenable" prayer.
The Supreme Court's latest order signifies a pivotal moment. The bench explicitly stated, "We want the primary board to give us a report that life-sustaining treatment can be withheld." Once the primary board submits its findings, the court will proceed to constitute a secondary board, if necessary, and pass further orders. The court registry has been directed to forward a copy of the order to the Noida hospital and to the office of Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati.
