EUTHANASIA [Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug case, 2011 and Common Cause (Reg. Society) case, 2005]

The landmark cases that expound the view of Article 21 of Constitution of India, 1950 and finally brought the concept of Passive euthanasia in the country. Right to Life also have the Right to Die with dignity (in certain grounds).

1. PRESTIGE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT, GWALIOR ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG vs. union of India, air 2011 BY- TARUN PRATAP SINGH KUSHWAH, BBALLB (H) 3 RD SEMESTER

2. ARUNA SHANBAUG VS. UNION OF INDIA CONTENT Introduction Facts Judgment [along with Common Cause (Registered Society) v. Union of India] Conclusion & Suggestions 2

3. INTROD UCTION Cases is related to the euthanasia. Euthanasia derives from Greek word “ Euthanatos ” which means easy death. It means the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful diseases or in an irreversible coma. This case is a landmark case where the court intrude the new term passive euthanasia and differ the active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. It is also a landmark judgment because it comes into the action without infringing the Article 21, i.e., Right to Life. 3

4. FACTS . Aruna was a nurse and the culprit was a ward boy at KEM hospital, Mumbai. The incident happened when Aruna was changing her clothes in the basement and ward boy ( Sohanlal ) caught to assault her sexually. During the attack in 1973, she was strangled with the dog chain and the lack of oxygen in the brain left her in a vegetative state. Later, when she was found by her fellow workers on the floor with the clothes in blood, she was admitted in the hospital. She was then in that condition where she had no control on her body and became a alive cadaver (vegetative state) and kept alive by a feeding tube for 48 years. After a long time, Pinki Virani filed a petition in the apex court on behalf of her to give her euthanasia as in the violation of Right to live with dignity. In the last, it was not found that Mr. Sohanlal sexually assault her. 4

5. .. 5 Slide Title The court denied to give the euthanasia to Aruna Ramchandra as the doctors and members of KEM hospital found that Aruna was not in the complete vegetative state, she respond sometime and feel the pain and the surrounding environment. Pinki was not that next friend to Aruna to whom the court considered. The court adopted the passive euthanasia but did not considered the living bill (until the judgment came in Common Cause v. Union of India ). The court issue some guidelines for the passive euthanasia and did not adopted the active euthanasia :- The decision to discontinue life support must be taken by the parents, spouse, or other close relatives or next friend in the absence of them. The decision requires approval from the concerning high court. Difference between active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. The court gives the power to decide to give her passive euthanasia to the nurses and they denied. JUDGEMENT

6. . 6 Common cause society vs. Union of India The court held with the 5 judges bench lead by Hon’ble Deepak Mishra . Right to life include right to die with dignity otherwise have a meaningful existence. The court suggest to apply the living bill concept that brings the freedom to the relatives as well as the doctor to work according to the bill. Guidelines were given as:- The person with soundmind with his total understanding can write a living bill that will be later signed infront of the magistrate by the person who write it and with two witnesses, valid. It shall be written clearly when the life supporting system will be taken back. The name of the person who has the authority to use the bill within the same manner it was written.

7. Cont … If the bill was not there then, the doctor shall consist of the medical board of the hospital which shall discuss the family physician and members of the family . The family members gives the consent in writing to take the further steps. The hospital inform the magistrate constitute a medical board comprising the Chief District Medical Officer as the chairman and other three experts- cardiology, neurology and other field of the general medical have experience of more than 15 years. The approval shall going to JMFC and the members of the family. The judge do the preliminary investigation for his satisfaction and later the magistrate verify the medical reports, examine the condition of the patient. If the authority did not satisfied with the reports and did not give the permission then, the hospital staff can seek permission from the High Court to withdraw the life support.

8. .. 8 Slide Title Justice Chandrachud observed, “Modern medical science should balance its quest to prolong life with need to provide patients quality of life. One is meaningless without the other.” The Supreme Court provides the guidelines but the parliament does not make any law to implement the judgment on the ground. So, there should be an Act for the same. The Medical Treatment of Ill Patients bill was pending in the parliament and must be implemented on the ground as soon as possible. The Parliament is not ready to adopt the living bill in the interest of the people but adopt the passive euthanasia . So, living bill helps in order to implement the euthanasia in a better way. The draft is against the concept of living bill that somewhere is like a barrier for euthanasia. Netherland, Belgium, Colombia, Lexumberg , Canada, Japan, Australia, Switzerland, Germany and others are the countries to adopt this concept and few countries adopt the both concept. Right to Life also have the right to die with dignity (in certain conditions). CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS

9. 9