By LiCAS News
On August 20, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud, denied a request from the parents of a 30-year-old man in a vegetative state for over a decade, seeking permission for passive euthanasia.
The plea was originally made after the man, a former engineering student, suffered a severe injury from a fall in 2013.
In an interview with the Catholic News Agency, Archbishop Raphy Manjaly of Agra and chairman of the doctrinal commission of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India praised the court’s firm stance.
“We would like to congratulate the Court for its unambiguous verdict while calling for support for the family facing a serious crisis,” the prelate said.
“We are extremely happy that the sacredness of life has been upheld by the court,” he added.
In a prior ruling in 2021, the Delhi High Court noted that the man was not sustained by mechanical means and could breathe independently, which was a key factor in its decision.
The Supreme Court echoed this stance, emphasizing that passive euthanasia could be considered only when life support is mechanical, which was not the case here.
The justices were sympathetic to the family’s hardships, as conveyed by the family’s lawyer, who highlighted the significant financial and emotional toll on the parents.
Chief Justice Chandrachud expressed concern for the aging parents and inquired about possible alternatives for care that might alleviate their burden.
Despite this, the court maintained that Indian law, as clarified in a 2018 judgment, prohibits administering lethal substances to end life, even if intended to ease suffering.
“Passive” euthanasia is permissible only when it involves discontinuing mechanical life support, not the removal of feeding tubes (cf. CCC 2276-2279).