COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY) versus UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY) versus UNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER

Passive euthanasia and advance directives (living will) are constitutionally permissible under Article 21 as a facet of the right to life with dignity, subject to safeguards. The law distinguishes passive euthanasia from active euthanasia, allowing withdrawal of artificial life support in terminally ill or vegetative patients while prohibiting active euthanasia. Adults with capacity may refuse medical treatment, and advance directives are valid with procedural safeguards. For incompetent patients, decision-making follows best interests determined by medical experts, with judicial oversight available.

Parties
Petitioner: COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY); Respondent: UNION OF INDIA; Respondent: ANOTHER
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) No. 215 of 2005 / Final Disposition
Outcome
Writ petition disposed of
Legal Topics
Right to Die With Dignity, Passive Euthanasia, Advance Directives, Right to Refuse Treatment, Right to Privacy and Bodily Integrity
Constitutional Law Medical Law Human Rights Right to Die With Dignity Passive Euthanasia Advance Directives Right to Refuse Treatment Right to Privacy and Bodily Integrity

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

COMMON CAUSE (A REGD. SOCIETY)

Petitioner

UNION OF INDIA

Respondent

ANOTHER

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) No. 215 of 2005 / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the right to die with dignity, including passive euthanasia and living will/advance directive, is part of Article 21 of the Constitution of India
  2. 2 Legality of passive euthanasia and advance directives in India
  3. 3 Distinction between passive and active euthanasia

Ratio Decidendi

Passive euthanasia and advance directives (living will) are constitutionally permissible under Article 21 as a facet of the right to life with dignity, subject to safeguards. The law distinguishes passive euthanasia from active euthanasia, allowing withdrawal of artificial life support in terminally ill or vegetative patients while prohibiting active euthanasia. Adults with capacity may refuse medical treatment, and advance directives are valid with procedural safeguards. For incompetent patients, decision-making follows best interests determined by medical experts, with judicial oversight available.

Court Disposition

Writ petition disposed of

Orders

  • Passive euthanasia and advance directives are permitted under Article 21, subject to procedural safeguards outlined in the judgment.
  • Directions issued for the execution and enforcement of advance directives and medical decision-making for incompetent patients.