Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. File
| Photo Credit: Shashi Shekhar Kashyap
The Supreme Court on Thursday (January 15, 2026) reserved for judgment a plea by the family of Harish Rana, a 31-year-old man, to withdraw life-sustaining treatment to him.
During the nearly hour-long hearing, a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan heard submissions made by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, for the Union government, and advocate Rashmi Nandakumar, appearing for the family of Mr. Rana.
At one point, Justice Viswanathan asked what would happen in a given situation if the family made an emotional decision to not go ahead in conflict with the medical opinion.
Justice Pardiwala suggested that the medical board may not come into the picture until and unless the family’s consent to withdrawing life support was made in writing.
The hearing highlighted the importance of the family taking a “consistent and well-considered” decision.
Ms. Nandakumar submitted that hospitals ought to nominate doctors who would be part of medical boards assigned to undertake the medical examinations in cases in which family members have come forward with a wish to withdraw life support.
“This could be done so that the Chief Medical Officers do not have to nominate doctors every time an application is made. So, that no time is lost,” Ms. Nandakumar explained.
The advocate urged the court to not use the terminology ‘passive euthanasia’ and instead use ‘withdrawing/withholding life-sustaining treatment’ in its judgment. Justice Pardiwala said the thought was in the minds of the judges from the very first day.
The Bench had personally met Mr. Rana’s parents and siblings, who said they did not want him to suffer anymore.
“All the three, i.e., the father, mother and younger brother, in one voice and with a lot of pain in their hearts, made a fervent appeal before us to take necessary steps to ensure that Harish does not suffer any more… According to them, if the medical treatment is not making any difference, then there is no point in continuing with such medical treatment and making Harish suffer for no good reason,” a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan had recorded the details of the interaction in a 12-page order published on Wednesday (January 14, 2026).
The court had also recorded the submission made by Ms. Bhati that primary and secondary boards of doctors who visited Mr. Rana were also of the opinion that medical treatment should be discontinued and “nature should be allowed to take its own course”.
“The doctors are of the opinion that Harish would remain in this permanent vegetative state (PVS) for years to come, with the tubes inserted all over his body. However, he would never be able to recover and live a normal life,” the court had recounted in the January 15 order.
Mr. Rana had sustained severe head injuries and 100% quadriplegic disability after sustaining a fall from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation as a Panjab University student in 2013. He has been bed-ridden for over 13 years now.
A report submitted in court jointly by lawyers representing both the family and the government quoted Mr. Rana’s father saying that his son “cannot speak, hear, see, recognise anyone, or eat on his own; Is entirely dependent on artificial life support, including a feeding tube… He shared his deep worry that both parents are now ageing, and asked, with visible concern, who would take care of Mr. Harish if anything were to happen to either of them”.
Published – January 15, 2026 02:14 pm IST
