Right To Life
Right To Life
Right To Life
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282293996
CITATIONS READS
0 3,013
1 author:
Pyali Chatterjee
ISBM University, Raipur
17 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Right now am working on PNDT ACT and MTP ACT 1971 of India View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Pyali Chatterjee on 12 December 2015.
Right to Life with Dignity also includes Right to Die with Dignity : Time To
Amend Article 21 of Indian Constitution and Law of Euthenesia
Pyali Chatterjee
Disha Law College Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India
ABSTRACT
Article 21 of Indian Constitution grants Right to life only. According to Article 21 says, “No person shall be
deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure establishedby law”. Right life under Article 21
does not include Right to die. Right to life is a natural right. The question regarding Right to die first time comes
before Bombay High Court in State of Maharashtra v. Maruty Sripati Dubal, 1987 Cri LJ 743. And here in this case
court declared that Right to Life includes Right to die, thus making Section 309 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 which
makes attempt to suicide as punishable offence unconstitutional. But Supreme Court in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab
(1996)2 SCC 648, held that Right to life does not include “Right to die” or “Right to be killed”. Right to life is a
natural right and right to die is not a natural right and no one has a right to finish their life in unnatural way. It was
only after the case of Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug versus Union of India (2011) 4 SCC 454, Supreme Court in its
judgment declared that Passive Euthanasia is legal in India.
Here my question is whether Right to life with dignity includes Right to life with dignity. If the answer is Yes then
why a cancer patients who were already in their last stage has to suffer lots till their death. In such cases active
euthanasia is the only option, getting relief from the pain of cancer. A person who is already bedridden and is
dependent on other for each and everything in that case how can we say that he is living with his dignity? In cancer
( last stage), most of the patients died in pathetic conditions, where neither they can bear the pain of the diseases nor
their family can watch their loved one in such an intolerable pain for such a long time. In such cases death with
dignity is last option for the family members as well as for the patients to finally get relived from the ultimate pain.
There is a need of Active Euthanasia for such patients.
Lastly, judgment of Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug versus Union of India should be reviewed once again and medical
committee should be formed to find out the cases where active euthanasia will be the ultimate option for the patients
to die with dignity and without tolerant any pain.
Keywords: Euthanasia, Physician assisted Suicide, Mercy killing, Right to die, Cancer
IJSRST151528 | Received: 05 December 2015 | Accepted: 12 December 2015 | November-December 2015 [(1)5: 117-121]
117
Dutch Commission on Euthanasia (1985) has defined it Code, 1860 and it is not unconstitutional to Indian
as: “A deliberate termination of life on an individuals‟ Constitution Art. 21. Right to life is a natural right and
request, by another, in medical terminology, the active right to die is not a natural right and no one has a right to
and deliberate termination of life on patients‟ request, by finish their life in unnatural way.
a doctor.”
Even when a petition was filed for Euthanasia, In Aruna
According to the definition given by Merriam Webster Ramchandra Shanbaug versus Union of India (2011)4
for Euthanasia, “the act or practice of killing or SCC 454, Supreme Court in its judgment declared that
permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured only Passive Euthanasia is legal in India; means when a
individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a person is on ventilation in that case only, patient can be
relatively painless way for reasons of mercy”. removed from the ventilation.
Again according to definition given in Oxford Even in India whether it is a Voluntary Euthanasia,
Dictionaries, Euthanasia means, “The painless killing of Involuntary Euthanasia or Non- Voluntary Euthanasia
a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease whatever the case may be is not acceptable and is illegal
or in an irreversible coma”. here and it is a punishable offence under Indian Penal
Code except the passive Euthanasia.
Again according to Black‟s Law Dictionary (8th edition)
euthanasia means “the act or practice of killing or B. Right to Life With Dignity
bringing about the death of a person who suffers from an
incurable disease or condition, esp. a painful one, for Right to life with dignity means, when a person is
reasons of mercy “. enjoying his life in a dignified way. Means something
which is not only a mere existence and not like the way
So, from the above definition we can interpret that which animal used to do. Now here lies my question,
Euthanasia is the practice of killing one person who is that whether a person who is bed ridden and dependent
sufferings from some kind of serious painful illness, so on other for his every basic needs e.g. last stage cancer
that he can get relief from his pain on the ground of patients in that cases whether he can be said that the
mercy and sometime even it is known as mercy killing person is enjoying his life with dignity. A person, who
also. even can‟t eat with his own hand, can‟t move from his
bed, can‟t even stand or walk for washroom, in such
II. METHODS AND MATERIAL cases we can‟t say that the person is living with dignity,
even though his family members love him lots and
A. Constitutional Vality of Right to Die In India taking proper care also but still no body will like such
kind of life.
Article 21 of Indian Constitution says, “No person shall
be deprived of his life or personal liberty except Now when a person has spent most of his life without
according to procedure established by law”. Right to depending on other and suddenly he has to depend on
life under Article 21 does not include Right to die. Right other for his every basic needs, in that case he loses his
to life is a natural right. Now, the question regarding self-confident, respect, independency etc which means a
Right to die first time comes before Bombay High Court person is surviving without his dignity. We also know
in State of Maharashtra v. Maruty Sripati Dubal 1987 that Right to life Under Article 21 also includes Right to
Cri LJ 743. And here in this case court declare that Right Privacy. Now when a person is bed ridden and he even
to Life includes Right to die, thus making Section 309 of can‟t change his own clothes or wear, in that case where
Indian Penal Code, 1860 which makes attempt to suicide is the Right To Privacy? This are certain instances which
as punishable offence unconstitutional. But Supreme I feel that is the basic and important thing which every
Court in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996)2 SCC 648, man do in their day today life , and no one would like to
held that Right to life does not include “Right to die” or depend on other for those basic needs.
“Right to be killed”. Thus, attempt to suicide is
punishable offence under section 309 of Indian Penal