India's Top Court Allows Withdrawal Of Life Support For Man In Vegetative State

2026-03-11 11:22:09

(MENAFN- Khaleej Times) India's Supreme Court authorised on Wednesday the withdrawal of life support from a man who has been in a vegetative state for over a decade, the first such ruling in the country's history.

India recognised passive euthanasia in 2018, permitting the removal of life support under strict conditions to allow death to occur naturally.

Recommended For You Fire breaks out in Abu Dhabi's Ruwais Industrial Complex after drone attack

But this marks the first time that a court has approved its use for an individual.

The parents of Harish Rana had sought to discontinue medical support for their son, who suffered severe head injuries in a fall from a building in 2013 and has been on life support since.

Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp channels.

The court granted their request on Wednesday, saying in its ruling that Rana exhibited "no meaningful interaction" and had been dependent on others for "all activities of self-care".

"His condition has shown no improvement," the court was quoted as saying by legal news website Bar and Bench.

Doctors had already concluded that Rana, who is in his early 30s, has virtually no chance of recovery.

But because he does not have a living will -- a legally binding document outlining preferences for medical care in the event of a terminal condition -- he has not been able to give his consent for passive euthanasia.

His parents, therefore, had petitioned the court to allow him to be taken off life support.

Active euthanasia, in which substances are directly administered to cause death, remains illegal in India.

But the national debate over allowing someone to die dates to the 2011 case of Aruna Shanbaug, a nurse who spent 42 years in a vegetative state following a brutal sexual assault.

The Supreme Court rejected a plea by Shanbaug's family to end her life, and she died from pneumonia in 2015 aged 66.

But it did issue a landmark opinion recognising passive euthanasia under strict safeguards and with judicial approval.

The move relied on earlier judgements that recognised the constitutional right to die with dignity, and served as a prelude to the expanded 2018 ruling on passive euthanasia.

Euthanasia remains a deeply divisive global issue, with supporters arguing that terminally ill patients should have the autonomy to choose a compassionate end to unbearable suffering, while opponents stress the sanctity of life.

A handful of countries, including the Netherlands, Belgium and Canada, allow both euthanasia and physician-assisted dying under tight safeguards.