Lucknow

The family of a 32-year-old man from Ghaziabad, who has been in a permanent vegetative state for over 12 years, told the Supreme Court of India that allowing withdrawal of artificial life support would restore his dignity after years of irreversible suffering.

The apex court allowed passive euthanasia for Harish Rana, who has remained comatose since 2013 after suffering severe head injuries in a fall from the fourth floor of his paying guest accommodation on August 20 that year.

Shortly after the judgment, journalists gathered outside the Brahm Raj Empire society in Ghaziabad where the family currently lives, while security personnel restricted access to outsiders.

Lawyer Rashmi Nandakumar, who represented the family before the Supreme Court, said the relatives were not in a position to speak to the media following the emotionally difficult ruling.

Attempts to contact Harish’s father Ashok Rana also did not yield a response.

Local residents said the family had spent years trying to secure treatment for their son. According to neighbours, Ashok Rana and his wife Nirmala Rana had sold their house in Delhi to fund medical care.

Residents said Ashok Rana, who earlier worked in the catering department of a hospitality chain, now receives a monthly pension of about Rs 3,600 and supplements his income by selling sandwiches near local cricket grounds.

In written submissions to the court, the family said Harish had been in an “irreversible and incurable permanent vegetative state” with 100 per cent disability for more than a decade. He survives through clinically assisted nutrition and hydration administered via a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube.

They argued that the feeding system merely sustains biological survival and offers no therapeutic benefit or possibility of reversing the severe brain injury.

Referring to the constitutional principle of the right to live with dignity under Article 21, the family said the law permits withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment when a patient’s condition is incurable and irreversible and medical intervention only prolongs suffering.

The plea also cited the guidelines laid down in the landmark Common Cause vs Union of India (2018) judgment, which recognised passive euthanasia and laid down procedures for withdrawing life-support in certain circumstances.

According to the submissions, two medical boards constituted under the court’s directions concluded that Rana’s condition was irreversible and confirmed that he had remained in a permanent vegetative state for more than 12 years.

The secondary medical board also noted that the feeding tube only provided sustenance for survival and could not restore cognitive function or reverse brain damage.

The family told the court 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 emphasised that the decision sought from the court concerned whether it was appropriate to prolong life artificially through medical intervention, rather than whether death itself was desirable.

Earlier, the family had approached the Delhi High Court in 2024 seeking the constitution of a medical board to examine his condition under the Common Cause guidelines. The high court dismissed the plea, noting that Rana was not dependent on mechanical life support.

The matter later reached the Supreme Court, which directed authorities to provide home medical care with assistance from the Union Health Ministry and the Uttar Pradesh government, while allowing the family to seek further directions if necessary.

Following a deterioration in his condition and hospitalisation in May 2025, the apex court ordered the formation of primary and secondary medical boards to assess his medical state.

Both boards confirmed that his neurological condition was irreversible and that continued medical intervention would not lead to improvement.

READ MORE: Zahida Khan: The first woman legislator from Mewat is an inspirational figure

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 plan for withdrawal of treatment while ensuring dignity in the process.