Supreme Court (SC) applies Passive Euthanasia framework for first time

• The SC in Harish Rana vs Union of India judgement permitted the withdrawal of artificial life support of a man who has been in a vegetative state for more than 12 years on the basis of Best Interest of the Patient Principle.
• The SC waived the usual 30-day consideration period as the patient’s parents and both medical boards unanimously agreed that recovery was impossible.
• Euthanasia refers to the hastening of a patient’s death to relieve suffering and is broadly classified into two types- Passive and Active (refer to box).
• Passive euthanasia
• Under it, a patient is allowed to die naturally by withholding or withdrawing medical treatment that sustains life.
• Active Euthanasia
• Active euthanasia refers to the physician’s deliberate act, usually the administration of lethal drugs, to end an incurably or terminally ill patient’s life.
• Active euthanasia is illegal in India. 
• Legalised in countries like the Netherlands, Belgium, etc. 
• Legal status: 
• Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug case (2011): SC rejected a plea for euthanasia, but allowed passive euthanasia under strict conditions for terminal and irreversible patients.
• In Common cause judgment (2018), SC recognised it and held that right to die with dignity is a fundamental right under Article 21. 
• In this case, it laid down guidelines for it and recognised the concept of a ‘living will’, with oversight involving DMs, judicial officers and medical specialists. 
• The court had held that passive euthanasia could be carried out using Advance Medical Directives.
• Modified Guidelines issued by the SC in 2023: A primary and a secondary medical board will have to be formed for an expert opinion on the withdrawal of artificial life support for a patient in a vegetative state.