India’s Supreme Court allows first-ever passive euthanasia death

Withdrawal of artificial life support granted to family of 32-year-old man who has been in a vegetative state for more than 12 years.Published On 11 Mar 2026India’s Supreme Court has allowed the country’s first case of passive euthanasia – withdrawal of artificial life support – for a 32-year-old man who has been in a vegetative state for more than 12 years.A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan on Wednesday permitted the withdrawal of life support to Harish Rana, a resident of the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, who suffered severe head injuries after falling from a building in 2013.Recommended Stories list of 4 itemslist 1 of 4India’s Supreme Court allows ‘passive euthanasia’list 2 of 4Slovenia referendum: Where is assisted dying legal?list 3 of 4Death doulas and end-of-life rights: The debate on assisted dyinglist 4 of 4‘I love life’: The man who has scheduled his death so he can enjoy livingend of list“The patient’s next of kin and the medical boards have reached the opinion that CAN [clinically administered nutrition] administration should be discontinued,” the India" class="entity-link entity-organization" data-entity-id="32432" data-entity-type="organization">Press Trust of India news agency quoted the Supreme Court bench as saying.The court was hearing a petition filed by Rana’s father, seeking permission to withdraw life-sustaining treatment for his son. The family said Rana was being kept artificially alive.The court in its ruling said 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.India recognised passive euthanasia in 2018, permitting the removal of life support under strict conditions to allow death to occur naturally. But this marks the first time that a court has approved its use for an individual.Doctors had already concluded that Rana 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.