Politics News

'Euthanasia will restore his dignity': Family of comatose man in SC

Lucknow, Mar 11 (PTI) The family of the 32-year-old Ghaziabad man who has been comatose for more than 12 years, in their plea to the Supreme Court, had said that allowing withdrawal of artificial life support will restore his dignity after years of irreversible suffering. The top court allowed passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, who has been in a permanent vegetative state since 2013 after suffering severe head injuries from a fall from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation on August 20 that year. Shortly after the Supreme Court pronounced its judgment, a crowd -- consisting mainly of journalists and television cameramen -- gathered outside the Brahm Raj Empire society in Ghaziabad, where the family currently resides. Security personnel at the residential complex tightened access and prevented outsiders from entering the premises. Rashmi Nandakumar, the lawyer who represented the family in the Supreme Court, told PTI over the phone that the family members were not in a position to comment on the development before the media. When PTI attempted to contact Ashok Rana, father of Harish Rana, the call was picked up, but there was no response from the other side. Even as the family was reluctant to open up on this emotive issue, local residents confirmed how the family had gone out of their way to get their son treated. Ashok Rana and his wife Nirmala Rana had sold their house in Delhi to meet the medical expenses of their son, some locals told the media. They added that Ashok Rana, who earlier worked in the catering department of a large hospitality chain, now receives a pension of about Rs 3,600 a month. Claiming anonymity, another resident said that Ashok Rana sells sandwiches at the nearby cricket grounds in the mornings to make ends meet. The resident also urged the media to give the family some privacy and personal time after the court's judgment. In written submissions before the court, the family said Harish Rana has remained in an "irreversible and incurable permanent vegetative state" with 100 per cent disability for more than 12 years and survives only with clinically assisted nutrition and hydration administered through a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube. They said the artificial feeding system merely sustains his biological survival and has no therapeutic benefit or possibility of reversing the severe brain injury. The family argued that continuing such treatment would only prolong life artificially without any prospect of recovery. Referring to the constitutional principle of the Right to Live with Dignity under Article 21, the submissions said the law permits withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in cases where a patient is in an incurable and irreversible condition and medical intervention only prolongs suffering. The family pleaded that passive euthanasia and the withdrawal of life-support systems are legally permissible when medical experts certify that the patient has no chance of recovery. According to the submissions, two medical boards constituted at the direction of the Supreme Court found Rana's condition to be irreversible and confirmed that he has remained in a permanent vegetative state for more than a decade. The secondary medical board also noted that the feeding tube being used in his case only provides sustenance for survival and cannot restore his cognitive function or reverse the underlying brain damage. The family told the court that their request was not motivated by a desire to cause death but by the belief that it was not in Rana's best interests to continue living in such a condition. They said the decision sought from the court was whether it was appropriate to prolong life artificially through continued medical intervention rather than whether death itself was desirable. The submissions also pointed out that Rana had been cared for at home by his parents for several years, which had delayed the formal medical board process envisaged under the Supreme Court's guidelines for withdrawal of life support. In 2024, the family approached the Delhi High Court seeking a direction for constitution of a medical board to examine his condition under the Common Cause guidelines. However, the high court dismissed the plea on the ground that Rana was not dependent on mechanical life support. The family later approached the Supreme Court, which directed authorities to provide home medical care with the assistance of the Union health ministry and the Uttar Pradesh government while granting liberty to seek further directions. Following a deterioration in his condition and hospitalisation in May 2025, the apex court directed the constitution of primary and secondary medical boards to examine the case. Both the boards concluded that Rana's condition was irreversible and that continued medical intervention could not improve his neurological state. The family said the request for withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment was therefore based on medical evidence and the legal framework evolved by the Supreme Court on passive euthanasia. They also highlighted that the guidelines laid down in the Common Cause judgment were intended to ensure that such decisions are taken in the patient's best interests while respecting the right to die with dignity. The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed passive euthanasia and directed the All India Institute of Medical Sciences to admit Rana for palliative care and prepare a tailored plan for withdrawal of treatment while ensuring dignity in the process. PTI MAN CDN RUK RUK

Latest Stories

Read Full Story