Right to Life, and Euthanasia under the Indian Constitution

Abstract

Life is a concept that goes far beyond mere biological survival such as breathing or heartbeat. It includes dignity, consciousness, autonomy, emotional well-being, and the ability to live meaningfully. The Constitution of India protects life through Article 21 — the Right to Life and Personal Liberty — which has been judicially interpreted to include not only the right to live with dignity but also, in certain circumstances, the right to die with dignity. With advances in medical science, situations have arisen where life can be artificially prolonged even when recovery is impossible, resulting in prolonged pain for patients and emotional suffering for families.
This paper examines the meaning of life from philosophical, medical, and legal perspectives and analyses whether biological existence alone constitutes living. It explores coma, vegetative states, disability, and conditions such as hydrocephalus, highlighting the suffering of patients and caregivers. The paper explains euthanasia, distinguishing between active and passive forms, and discusses the Indian legal position through landmark Supreme Court judgments. Ethical, social, and familial concerns are also examined. Through case studies and recent legal developments, the paper argues that dignity must remain central to both life and death under Article 21.
Recent judicial developments have further strengthened the constitutional understanding of dignity at the end of life. In 2026, the Supreme Court permitted the withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment for a patient who had remained in a persistent vegetative state for more than thirteen years. The Court emphasised that the right to die with dignity is inseparable from the right to live with dignity under Article 21 and clarified that withdrawal of futile medical treatment is not an act of killing but an act of allowing natural death with compassion.

Keywords