IN THE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION No. 115 of 2009
ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG vs UNION OF INDIA (2011) 4 SCC 454
Passive EUTHANASIA case granted in 2011 By Supreme Court of India
SUMMARY AND IMPORTANT POINTS AND CITATIONS
ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG vs UNION OF Asian country (2011) IX SCC 454
ARUNA RAMCHANDRA SHANBAUG —————-Petitioner
UOI & OTHERS —————————Respodent
Bench: Markandey Katju, Gyan Sudha Misra
THE SUPREME COURT beneath ARTICLE thirty two (32)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
- Aruna Rama Shanbaug was a employees Nurse operating in KEM Hospital, Mumbai. On the evening of twenty seventh November, 1973 she was attacked by a sweeper within the hospital World Health Organization wrapped a dog chain round her neck and yanked her back with it. He tried to rape her however finding that she was sick, he sodomized her. To immobilize her throughout this act he twisted the chain round her neck.
2. The next day, a cleaner found her in unconscious condition lying on the ground. it absolutely was alleged that because of strangulation by the dog chain the availability of O2 gas to the brain stopped and also the brain got stopped working function properly.
3.Thirty six years had been passed of the irreligious of that incident occurred. She had been extant on mashed food and unable to maneuver her hands or legs. it absolutely was alleged that there’s no chance of any improvement in her scenario which she was entirely captivated with KEM Hospital, Mumbai. it absolutely was prayed to direct the Respondents refrain of feeding Aruna and let her die in peace by agent of petitioner Pinki Virani.
- Hon’ble Court determined to appoint a team of 3 eminent doctors to research and report on the precise physical and mental conditions of Aruna.
5. They studied Aruna Shanbaug’s case history well and opined that Aruna isn’t brained dead. She reacts to specific things in her own approach. The employees of KEM Hospital conjointly was taking comfortable care of her. Also, there wasn’t found any hint or suggestion from the visual communication of Aruna on the temperament to terminate her life. Further, the nursing staffs at KEM Hospital were quite willing to require care of her. Thus, the doctors opined that that kill within the instant matter isn’t necessary.
OBSERVATION AND DECISION:
6.The petition was rejected by the SCI on seven March 2011.
7.The Court opined that supported the doctors’ report and also the definition of cerebral death beneath the Transplantation of Human Organs Act,1 Aruna wasn’t dead. tho’ she is during a PVS, her condition was been stable. So, terminating her life was undue.
8. Further, the correct to require call on her behalf unconditional with the management and employees of KEM (King Edward Memorial) Hospital and not Pinki Virani. admitting of kill to Aruna would mean reversing the efforts taken by the nurses of KEM Hospital over the years.
9.They, however, in agreement that passive kill, i.e. retreating medical treatment with a deliberate intention of inflicting the patient’s death, had to be legalized. this can be an influence that may solely be exercised on a individual basis by a state supreme court beneath Article 226 on the applying filed by successive friend/doctors/hospital employees praying for permission to withdraw the life support to incompetent person of the sort of mentioned above.
10.Alongside, the court conjointly created a recommendation to repeal Section 309 of the Indian legal code. This case could be a landmark case because it prescribed the procedure to be followed in a part that has not been legislated upon.
This is one amongst the foremost illustrious cases that urged for the requirement to alter the kill laws country like INDIA.
To be ready to adjudicate upon the same problems, the court explained on what’s kill and had checked whether or not Right to Die can return beneath the that means of Article 213. The case conjointly analysed ought to sec 309 of the IPC 1860 be penal in nature.
Euthanasia is of 2 types: active and passive. Active kill entails the utilization of fatal substances or forces to kill an individual. Passive kill entails withholding of medical treatment for continuance of life. an additional categorization of kill is between voluntary kill and non-voluntary kill. Voluntary kill is wherever the consent is taken from the patient, whereveras non-voluntary kill is where the consent is unobtainable
This case revolves round the constitutionality of non-voluntary passive kill. however permitting kill to Aruna would have understood reversing the efforts taken by staffs of the KEM Hospital.
In the case of MAHARASHTRA v. Maruty Shripati Dubal the rivalry was that Section 309 of the Indian legal code was unconstitutional because it is offensive of Article – nineteen and twenty one. it absolutely was command during this that ‘right to life’ conjointly includes ‘right to die’ and section 309 was smitten down.
In the case of P.Rathinam v/s. Union of India , it absolutely was command that the scope of Article twenty one includes the ‘right to die’.
In the case of Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, the validity of Section 306 of the IPC was in question, that fined the instigation of suicide. This case overruled P.Rathinam case however the court opined that within the context of a terminally sick patient or one within the PVS, the correct to die isn’t termination of life untimely however rather fast the method of death that has already commenced. Further, it absolutely was conjointly submitted that the correct to measure with human dignity should conjointly embody a death with dignity and not one amongst subsisting mental and physical agony.
Article 19 of Indian Constitution:-Protection of Certain Rights regarding freedom of speech,
Aticle 21 of Indian Constitution :-Protection of life and personal liberty
No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law
Article 32 of Indian Constitution:-Remedies for enforcement of rights,
Article 213 of Indian Constitution:-this article give empower the Governor to promulgate the ordinace
Article 226 of Indian Constitution:- the power to HC to issue writs
Section 309 Indian Penal Code:- Hurt
Case of passive euthanasia
*to better understant the meaning of euthanasia, watch Movie Gujaarish of Hrithik Raushan and Aishwarya Rai Bachhan
Post Credit:- satakshi