New Delhi, Jan 15 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment on a plea filed by the father of a 31-year-old man, lying in a comatose condition for more than 12 years, seeking passive euthanasia
for his son by withdrawing his artificial life support.
The man, Harish Rana, suffered head injuries after falling from the fourth floor of a building in 2013. He is on an artificial support system for more than 12 years now.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan heard submissions from Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Union government, and advocate Rashmi Nandakumar, representing the father, Ashok Rana, for almost an-hour.
Passive euthanasia is the intentional act of letting a patient die by withholding or withdrawing life support or the treatment necessary to keep him alive.
During the hearing, the bench highlighted the importance of the family taking a “consistent and well-considered” decision.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that hospitals should nominate doctors who would be part of medical boards assigned to undertake the medical examinations in cases where family members have come forward with a wish to withdraw life support.
Nandakumar also requested the court not to use the term "passive euthanasia" and instead use "withdrawing/withholding life-sustaining treatment" in its judgment.
On January 13, the top court judges personally met Rana’s parents and his younger brother, who said they did not want him to suffer anymore.
"What they tried to convey, in their own way, was that the medical treatment imparted over a period of almost two years be discontinued and nature be allowed to take its own course.
"According to them, if the medical treatment is not making any difference, there is no point in continuing with such treatment and making Harish suffer for no good reason. They believe that Harish is suffering like anything, and he should be relieved of all further pain and suffering," the bench had noted in its order.
The top court earlier expressed its desire to meet the parents of the 31-year-old man.
It had perused a report containing Rana's medical history filed by a secondary medical board of doctors from the AIIMS Delhi and remarked that it was a "sad" report.
The primary medical board, after examining the patient's condition, had stressed the negligible chance of his recovery.
The top court had, on December 11, noted that according to the report of the primary medical board, the man is in a "pathetic condition".
According to the guidelines issued by the apex court 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.
Representing the patient's father, Nandakumar had said on December 11 that according to a 2018 judgement of the apex court, the next step is to be followed by referring the case to a secondary board formed by the chief medical officer.
This was the second time in as many years that the petitioner approached the top court seeking passive euthanasia for his sons.
On November 8, 2024, the court took note of the Union health ministry's report, suggesting that the patient be put in home care with assistance from the Uttar Pradesh government and regular visits by doctors and a physiotherapist.
The court said that if home care is not feasible, the patient should be shifted to the district hospital in Noida for ensuring the availability of proper medical care.
Describing the case as a "very hard one", the apex court sought the Centre's response on August 20 last year on the plea of the parents of Rana, who was a student of the Panjab University and had suffered head injuries after falling from the fourth floor of his paying-guest accommodation in 2013.
He remains completely bed-ridden and on an artificial support system for more than 12 years now.
The Supreme Court had agreed with the findings of the Delhi High Court, which had refused to constitute a medical board to consider Rana's parents' plea that their son be allowed to undergo passive euthanasia.
The top court had said Rana was not on a ventilator or on other mechanical support to sustain life and rather, was being fed through a food pipe and hence, no case was made out for passive euthanasia.
The court was, however, considerate of the fact that he has been in a vegetative state for more than a decade and his old parents are finding it difficult to sustain the life through treatment as they have even sold their house.
Last July, the Delhi High Court refused to refer Rana's case to a medical board for allowing him to undergo passive euthanasia.
The high court had said the facts of the case indicate that the man is not being kept alive mechanically and he is able to sustain himself without any extra external aid. PTI PKS ARI
