KATHMANDU, March 11: In a landmark decision that has reignited debate over end-of-life care in India, the country’s Supreme Court (SC) has permitted the withdrawal of life support for a 31-year-old man who has remained in a vegetative state for more than a decade following a tragic accident.
According to Indian media reports, the ruling allows doctors to withdraw life-sustaining treatment for Harish Rana, an engineering student who suffered severe brain injuries after falling from a fourth-floor balcony in 2013 while studying at Punjab University in Chandigarh. Since the accident, Rana has remained in a comatose state with no meaningful interaction with the outside world.
The decision is being described as one of the most significant applications of India’s legal framework on passive euthanasia — the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining medical treatment. India recognised passive euthanasia in a landmark Supreme Court ruling in 2018, although active euthanasia, which involves intentionally assisting a person to end their life, remains illegal in the country.
For more than a decade, Rana’s parents have cared for their son while repeatedly seeking legal permission to withdraw life support. Indian media reports say the family had exhausted their savings during years of medical care and had expressed concern about who would look after their son if they were no longer able to do so.
Tourism department issues 128 climbing permits for spring
Their first major legal attempt came in 2024 when they petitioned the Delhi High Court seeking passive euthanasia for their son. The court rejected the plea, noting that Rana had not been placed on conventional life-support machines and was able to sustain basic biological functions.
The family later approached the SC again in 2025, arguing that Rana was effectively being kept alive through artificial medical interventions, including feeding and breathing support.
Before delivering its decision, the Supreme Court asked two independent medical boards to examine Rana’s condition. Both boards concluded that he had suffered permanent brain damage and had almost no chance of recovery.
According to Indian legal news portal Bar and Bench, the judges observed that Rana exhibited sleep–wake cycles but showed no meaningful interaction and was entirely dependent on others for daily care. The medical boards also reported that he required external assistance for feeding and other bodily functions and had developed severe bed sores due to prolonged immobility.
Following these findings, the court allowed medical experts to exercise their clinical judgement regarding the withdrawal of treatment.
The case has also sparked wider debate in India over “living wills”, legal documents through which individuals can specify the type of medical care they wish to receive if they develop a terminal illness or lose the capacity to make decisions.
India’s 2018 ruling on passive euthanasia recognised such directives, allowing adults to state in advance whether they want to be placed on life-support systems or receive only palliative care. However, Rana had not created a living will before the accident, leaving the decision to his family and the courts.
Speaking to Indian media after the ruling, Rana’s father, Ashok Rana, described the decision as deeply painful but necessary. He expressed gratitude to the Supreme Court for what he called a humanitarian judgement.
“This is a difficult decision for our family, but we are doing what is best for Harish,” he said.
