Right to Die with Dignity
Indian Polity & Governance
- PYQs8
- Articles1
Background
This concept involves the interpretation of fundamental rights, the role of the judiciary in safeguarding individual liberties, ethical dilemmas in healthcare, and the implementation of judicial pronouncements by the executive. It touches upon constitutional law, medical ethics, and public policy.
The right to die with dignity, encompassing passive euthanasia, has been recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution by the Supreme Court, allowing terminally ill patients to refuse life-sustaining treatment. This right is operationalized through structured guidelines, including the use of Advance Medical Directives.
Facts & tables
- Constitutional Basis
- Recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) by the Supreme Court.
- Judicial Mandate
- Supreme Court judgments in 2018 and 2023 established and refined guidelines for its implementation.
- Scope
- Primarily concerns passive euthanasia, involving the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for terminally ill patients.
- Mechanism
- Requires an Advance Medical Directive or consent from guardians/next of kin, validated by medical boards.
| Scenario | Key Steps |
|---|---|
| With Advance Medical Directive | Directive prepared by patient (sound mind, 2 witnesses, Notary attested); copy to local authority; medical boards review and approve. |
| Without Advance Medical Directive | Primary Medical Board consults family/guardian; guardian's written consent; Secondary Medical Board examines; High Court appeal if boards disagree. |
| Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Conceptual area | Constitutional Law |
| Conceptual area | Medical Ethics |
| Body | Role |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of India | Interprets law |
| State Government (Department of Health, Medical and Family Welfare) | Implements |
| High Court | Adjudicates |
| Medical Boards (Primary & Secondary) | Evaluates |
| Local Authority (Municipality/Corporation/Panchayat) | Administers |
Prelims angle
Prelims angle: Factual recall
Prelims angle: Conceptual understanding
- Right to die with dignity is a fundamental right (Article 21).
- Supreme Court judgments (2018, 2023) guide passive euthanasia.
- Advance Medical Directive (Living Will) is a key mechanism.
- Medical boards and guardian consent are crucial for withdrawal of life support.
- High Court can be approached if medical boards disagree.
| Year | Framing tags |
|---|---|
| 2025 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2024 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
| 2024 | Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions |
| 2023 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Conceptual understanding, Factual recall |
| 2019 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
| 2018 | Conceptual understanding, Factual recall |
| 2018 | Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall |
Timeline
-
Constitutional Law
Conceptual area
-
Medical Ethics
Conceptual area
-
Prelims 2018
Conceptual understanding, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2018
Multi-statement analysis, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2019
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Conceptual understanding, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2023
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2024
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2024
Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions
-
Prelims 2025
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Nod for guidelines ensuring dignified natural death for terminally-ill patients
The Supreme Court has affirmed the right to die with dignity under Article 21, establishing guidelines for passive euthanasia through Advance Medical Directives and medical board approvals, ensuring a legal framework for end-of-life decisions.
See also
Past papers
2018–2025 · 8 questions
In the news
Nod for guidelines ensuring dignified natural death for terminally-ill patients
The Supreme Court has affirmed the right to die with dignity under Article 21, establishing guidelines for passive euthanasia through Advance Medical Directives and medical board approvals, ensuring a legal framework for end-of-life decisions.
Try these PYQs
Under which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India, has the Supreme Court of India placed the Right to Privacy?
* The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs Union of India (2017), declared that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India. * The court held that this right is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. * Article 21: States that 'No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.' The court interpreted 'personal liberty' broadly to include various aspects of privacy. _While the other options are fundamental rights, they are not directly where the Right to Privacy is placed:_ * Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. * Article 16: Guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. * Article 19: Guarantees certain freedoms like speech and expression, assembly, etc.
Consider the following statements:
Statement-I: The Supreme Court of India has held in some judgements that the reservation policies made under Article 16(4) of the Constitution of India would be limited by Article 335 for maintenance of efficiency of the administration.
Statement-II: Article 335 of the Constitution of India defines the term 'efficiency of administration'.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
* Statement I is correct: It has frequently been argued that reservation is contrary to efficiency and merit. Even the Supreme Court of India appeared to have agreed with this argument in some of its judgments, holding that Article 335 mention of the term efficiency of administration will limit the scope of Article 16(4) provision for reservation in services. * Statement II is incorrect: Article 335 of the Constitution of India states that the claims of the members of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the maintenance of efficiency of administration, in the making of appointments to services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or of a State. * Article 335 of the Indian Constitution only mentions the efficiency of administration and does not define the same.
‘Right to privacy’ is protected under which Article of the Constitution of India?
The right to privacy in India is not explicitly mentioned in a single article of the Constitution. However, it is considered an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21. This recognition came about through a landmark Supreme Court judgment in 2017, K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs Union of India. The court ruled that the right to privacy is an inseparable part of the right to life and personal liberty, and is protected under Article 21.
Which Article of the Constitution of India safeguards one’s right to marry the person of one’s choice?
Article 21: This article states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has expanded the scope of personal liberty to include various fundamental rights, including the right to marry a person of one's choice. Shamima Begum vs. State of Assam (2018): The court ruled that a woman has the right to marry a person of her choice, reinforcing that personal decisions related to marriage fall under individual autonomy and personal liberty as guaranteed by Article 21. Hadiya's case (Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M): The Supreme Court upheld the right to marry as a fundamental right under Article 21. It ruled that an adult woman is free to make decisions regarding her marriage, rejecting attempts to interfere in personal choices. The court emphasized that state or societal disapproval cannot restrict an individual’s right to marry.
A Writ of Prohibition is an order issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to :
Writ of Prohibition: * It is a judicial order issued by a higher court (Supreme Court or High Court) to a lower court or tribunal. * It prevents the lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to law. * Purpose: To stop ongoing proceedings in a case where the lower court lacks jurisdiction or violates legal procedures. * Nature: It is preventive, ensuring the lower court does not act unlawfully rather than correcting a wrong decision after it has occurred. * Example: If a tribunal starts hearing a case that legally falls under the jurisdiction of a civil court, the Writ of Prohibition can halt such proceedings. * Comparison with Certiorari: Prohibition is issued before judgment to stop proceedings, whereas Certiorari is issued after judgment to quash orders passed unlawfully.
Show 3 more PYQs
Consider the following statements :
1. As per the Right to Education (RTE) Act, to be eligible for appointment as a teacher in a State, a person would be required to possess the minimum qualifications laid down by the concerned State Council of Teacher Education.
2. As per the RTE Act, for teaching primary classes, a candidate is required to pass a Teacher Eligibility Test conducted in accordance with the National Council of Teacher Education guidelines.
3. In India, more than 90% of teacher education institutions are directly under the State Governments.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is incorrect: As per the RTE Act, the minimum qualification for teachers is set by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), not the state council. Statement 2 is correct: The RTE Act mandates that candidates must pass the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) to qualify for teaching primary classes. The NCTE sets the guidelines for conducting this test. Statement 3 is incorrect: According to the All India Survey on Higher Education (AISHE) 2019-20, approximately 67% of teacher education institutions in India are privately managed, while only around 33% are government-run. Hence, the correct answer is option (b) 2 only.
With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements:
I. An Ordinance can amend any Central Act.
II. An Ordinance can abridge a Fundamental Right.
III. An Ordinance can come into effect from a back date.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
An Ordinance is a temporary law issued by the President (Article 123) or Governor (Article 213) when the legislature is not in session. It holds the same force as a regular law, but must adhere to constitutional limits. ✅ Statement I: Correct
* An Ordinance can amend any Central Act, just like a Parliamentary law, subject to constitutional provisions. ❌ Statement II: Incorrect
* Ordinances cannot abridge Fundamental Rights as per Article 13(2) of the Constitution. Any such provision is void. ✅ Statement III: Correct
* Ordinances can be given retrospective effect, i.e., they can be enforced from a past date.
Right to Privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty. Which of the following in the Constitution of India correctly and appropriately imply the above statement?
Right to Privacy and Article 21: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. In the landmark 2017 judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India unanimously held that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21. This ruling reinforced privacy as a fundamental right, ensuring protection against unwarranted state and private intrusions. Part III of the Constitution covers Fundamental Rights, which include: - Article 19: Right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, and other essential liberties. - Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, which now includes privacy after the Puttaswamy judgment. Article 14: Ensures equality before the law, but does not explicitly deal with privacy. Article 17: Abolishes untouchability. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are non-enforceable guidelines, not fundamental rights. Article 24: Prohibits child labor but has no relation to privacy. Thus, the right to privacy is most closely linked to Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III of the Indian Constitution. Hence the correct answer is option (c).