LexARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
• [2011] 4 S.C.R. 1057 ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 115 of 2009) MARCH 7, 2011 [MARKANDEY KAT JU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.) Human Rights: A B Euthanasia - Withdrawal of life support - Writ petition c filed in Supreme Court seeking euthanasia for a 60 year old woman - Petitioner was a Staff Nurse working in KEM Hospital, Mumbai, who was assaulted by a sweeper in the hospital who sodomized her and during this act twisted a dog chain around her neck due to which supply of oxygen to the 0 Petitioner's brain stopped and her brain got damaged - Petitioner lay bed-ridden in KEM Hospital, Mumbai since 1973 allegedly in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) - Held: The Petitioner cannot be said to be dead - Even from the report of Committee of Doctors it appears that she has some E brain activity, though very little - The Petitioner recognizes that persons are around her and expresses her like or dislike by making some vocal sound and waving her hand by certain movements - She smiles if she receives her favourite food, fish and chicken soup - She breathes normally and does not require a heart lung machine or intravenous tube for feeding F - Her dementia has not progressed and has remained stable for many years - Whatever the condition of her cortex, her brain stem is certainly alive - Though the Petitioner's parents are dead and other close relatives are not interested in her ever since she had the unfortunate assault on her, however, G the KEM hospital staff have been caring for her day and night for so many long years, who really are her next friends - Hence it is for the KEM hospital staff to tak~ a decision on withdrawal of life support to the Petitioner - The KEM hospital 1057 H 1058 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 4 S.C.R. A staff have clearly expressed their wish that Petitioner should be allowed to live - However, assuming that the KEM hospital staff at some future time changes its mind, in such a situation the KEM hospital would have to apply to the Bombay High Court for approval of the decision to withdraw life support - B Petition accordingly dismissed. Euthanasia - Withdrawal of life support of a patient in Permanent Vegetative State (PVS) - No statutory provision in India as to the legal procedure for withdrawing life support to a person in PVS or who is otherwise incompetent to take a C decision in this connection - Held: Passive euthanasia should be permitted in India in certain situations. Euthanasia - Withdrawal of life support of a patient in Permanent Vegetative State (PVS) - Law laid down by D Supreme Court in this connection until Parliament makes a law on the subject - Held: A decision has to be taken to discontinue life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a body of persons E acting as a next friend - If can also be taken by the doctors attending the patient - However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the best interest of the patient - Even if a decision is taken by the near relatives or doctors or next friend to withdraw life support, such a decision requires approval F from the High Court - This is even more necessary since cannot rule out the possibility of mischief being done by relatives or others for inheriting the property of the patient - This is in the interest of the protection of the patient, protection of the doctors, relative and next friend, and for re-assurance G of the patient's family as well as the public - This is also in consonance with the doctrine of parens patriae. Euthanasia - Withdrawal of life support to a person who is unable to take a decision as regards such withdrawal - H Application for, by near relatives or next friend or the doctors! • ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG v. UNION OF 1059 INDIA AND ORS. hospital staff- Power of High Court u/Art.226 - Held: Article A 226 gives abundant power to the High Court to pass suitable orders on the application filed by the near relatives or next friend or the doctors/hospital staff praying for permission to withdraw the life support - Procedure to be adopted by the High Court when such an application is filed - When such an B application is filed the Chief Justice of the High Court should I forthwith constitute a Bench of at least two Judges who should I decide to grant approval or n
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.