In News:

The Supreme Court of India has recently agreed to hear a plea seeking the right to passive euthanasia for rabies patients, citing the exceptional nature of the disease and the absence of a cure. The matter, listed for hearing after two weeks, is poised to test the scope and application of the 2018 passive euthanasia ruling under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Background of the Case

• The petition was filed by the NGO All Creatures Great and Small in 2019, challenging a Delhi High Court order (July 2019) which refused to classify rabies as an exceptional case warranting "death with dignity".
• The Supreme Court issued notice in January 2020 to the Centre and other stakeholders, seeking their response.
• On February 10, 2025, a bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran agreed to hear the matter after two weeks.

Grounds for the Plea

The NGO has urged the Court to lay down a specific protocol enabling terminally ill rabies patients or their guardians to opt for passive euthanasia under medical supervision. Key arguments include:

• Rabies has a 100% fatality rate once symptoms appear.
• The disease often leads to violent neurological symptoms, requiring patients to be tied or shackled to beds, stripping them of dignity and personal freedom.
• The intense suffering and irreversible nature of rabies, coupled with the lack of any effective treatment, makes it distinct from other terminal conditions.
• The plea seeks the creation of an exceptional legal category for rabies within the framework of the 2018 Supreme Court judgment.

Understanding Euthanasia in India

Definitions:

• Euthanasia literally means “good death” and refers to hastening death to relieve pain and suffering.
• Active Euthanasia involves deliberate acts to cause death (e.g., lethal injection) and remains illegal in India.
• Passive Euthanasia involves withholding or withdrawing life support from terminally ill patients and was legalised in 2018.

Legal Milestone:

• In the Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) case, a five-judge Constitution Bench ruled that the right to die with dignity is a part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.
• The verdict permitted passive euthanasia and the creation of a “living will”—a legal document allowing patients to refuse life support if in a terminal or vegetative state.

Ethical and Constitutional Dimensions

• The plea raises significant questions about human dignity, bodily autonomy, and the limits of state intervention in end-of-life decisions.
• It also brings focus to judicial responsibility in expanding fundamental rights, especially in the context of terminal, untreatable illnesses.

Conclusion

The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications on medical jurisprudence and the ethics of end-of-life care in India. If the Court recognizes rabies as an exception, it may set a precedent for disease-specific passive euthanasia protocols, expanding the practical application of the 2018 ruling.