In a landmark judgement passed by five-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, the

Court has recognized right to die with dignity as a fundamental right. The Bench has hence
recognized passive euthanasia and living will in India.

living will

A 'living will' is where a patient can give assent that permits withdrawal of life emotionally
supportive networks if the individual is decreased to a lasting vegetative state with no genuine
possibility of survival.

It is a sort of development order that might be utilized by a man before crippling to plot a full
scope of treatment inclinations or, regularly, to dismiss treatment. A living can detail a man's
inclinations for tube-encouraging, counterfeit hydration, and torment solution when an
individual can't impart his/her decisions. The US, UK, Germany and Netherlands have advance
medicinal mandate laws that enable individuals to make a 'living will'.

Active Euthanasia

Active euthanasia, the act of passing of a patient in extraordinary enduring, is unlawful in India.
It involves intentionally causing the patient's passing through infusions or overdose. In any case,
Passive Euthanasia , the withdrawal of medicinal treatment with the ponder goal to rush a
critical condition so that the patient's passing will be easier was allowed by the Supreme
Court.Therefore ,the SC court likewise set down rules on who might execute the will and how a
gesture for inactive killing would be conceded by a therapeutic barricade set to decide and do
any "advance order". In situations where there is no "advance order", the patient, family,
companions and legitimate gatekeepers can't take the choice all alone, yet can approach a high
court for ceasing treatment .

The US, UK, Germany and Netherlands have advance restorative mandate laws that enable
individuals to make a 'living will'.

important judgments on Euthanasia

"Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab[1]– In this case, Five-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court overruled
the Supreme Court’s holding in the case of Maruti Shri Pati Dubal v. State of Maharashtra and P.
Rathinam v. Union of India & Anr. In Maruti Shi Pati Dubal case, the Supreme Court held Section
309 of Indian Penal Code (this makes attempt to commit suicide a punishable offence in India) as
violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In P. Rathinam case, the Supreme
Court held that the “right to die” is a right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution and
hence Section 309 of Indian Penal Code was unconstitutional."

"In Gian Kaur case, the Supreme Court held that both euthanasia and assisted suicide were not
lawfully valid in India."

"Aruna Shanbaug v. Union of India- In this case, the Petitioner was in a permanent vegetative
state (PVS) for 37 long years. In the case, the Two-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court allowed
passive euthanasia subject to certain conditions and subject to the approval of the High Court
after following the due procedure as laid down by the Court in the case. "

The Supreme Court pointed out that according to the proponents of Euthanasia, while we
can debate whether active euthanasia should be legal, there cannot be any doubt about
passive euthanasia as “you cannot prosecute someone for failing to save a life”.