In 2026, the Supreme Court applied the right to die with dignity in the case of Harish Rana, a 32-year-old man who had been in a persistent vegetative state for nearly 13 years. The Court treated Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (CANH) as a form of medical treatment. On that basis, it permitted withdrawal of CANH when the proper legal process and medical board opinions supported that course. The Court also directed transfer of the patient to AIIMS Delhi.
The constitutional core of the case is Article 21, which protects life and personal liberty and has been interpreted to include dignity. The legal background comes from the Supreme Court's Common Cause decision of 2018, which recognised the right to die with dignity and the framework for passive euthanasia. In the Harish Rana case, that framework was applied to a concrete medical situation involving prolonged persistent vegetative state and medically assisted nutrition and hydration. The Court also assessed continued treatment against the patient's best interests while relying on medical assessment and board opinion.
For exam preparation, the issue connects current affairs with constitutional law, fundamental rights, the role of the judiciary, health governance and dignity-related rights. In prelims, likely recall areas include Article 21, the meaning of CANH, the Common Cause precedent, the patient's age and the nearly 13-year persistent vegetative state. In mains, the case can be used to discuss individual dignity, legal process, the role of medical boards and safeguards related to withdrawal of treatment. It is relevant for both RAS and UPSC because it links a current Supreme Court ruling with constitutional governance and static GK.