On his last day, CJI DY Chandrachud gave relief to parents seeking euthanasia for son

Justice DY Chandrachud directed the Uttar Pradesh government to explore ways to cover the medical expenses for Harish Rana's care.

The parents of 30-year-old Harish Rana, who has been in a vegetative state for over 13 years following a severe head injury, have finally received much-needed relief after the intervention of former Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud on his last working day, reported India Today.

Former Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud provided relief to parents in his last hearing(HT_PRINT)

Due to the financial strain of their son's ongoing medical care, the parents had petitioned the Supreme Court for permission to pursue passive euthanasia, requesting the right to withdraw his life-support.

Passive euthanasia involves withdrawing artificial life support from a patient so they can receive a natural death.

Justice DY Chandrachud directed the Uttar Pradesh government to explore ways to cover the medical expenses for Harish Rana's care, as his parents were unable to support their son financially.

Ashok Rana, 62, and Nirmala Devi, 55, have faced major financial hurdles in taking care of their son after he suffered a traumatic head injury and quadriplegia after falling from a fourth-floor window while studying in Mohali.

During his last hearing, Justice Chandrachud reviewed a status report from the Centre, which outlined a comprehensive care plan. The report confirmed that the UP government would provide home care services, including regular visits from a physiotherapist and dietician, as well as on-call medical officers and nursing support.

The government would also bear the cost of all essential medications and medical supplies.

Chandrachud also noted that in case home care became unsuitable for Rana, he should be shifted to the district hospital in Noida for more structured medical support.

The family accepted the government's plan and took back its plea for passive euthanasia.

In a previous ruling, the Delhi high court had ruled against active euthanasia for Rana, as he could sustain himself in a coma without external life support.

Justice Subramonium Prasad, on the Delhi high court bench for the case, referred to the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling on euthanasia, which allowed passive euthanasia under specific conditions but made it clear that active euthanasia remains legally prohibited in India.

“No one, including a physician, is permitted to cause the death of another person by administering any lethal drug, even if the intent is to relieve pain and suffering,” said the high court judgement.

In 2018, the apex court made a landmark judgement on euthanasia stating that, though a person could refuse life-saving treatment, passive euthanasia would only be allowed when the patient or their kin chose to withdraw life-support measures, without actively choosing an end to their life.