nam 22 uu 4500 10.59704/f81589d5036f8434 DE-Verfassungsblog cr||||| 260328s2026||||xx#|||||o|||| ||| 0|eng|| 10.59704/f81589d5036f8434 doi eng 342 23 Sengupta, Raghav Author aut Dignity at the End - Analysing the Indian Supreme Court’s First Judicially Sanctioned Passive Euthanasia Order Sengupta, Raghav Verfassungsblog 2026-03-28 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier On 11 March 2026, the Supreme Court of India allowed the withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment in the case of Harish Rana v. Union of India. The Court’s acceptance of non-voluntary passive euthanasia through a best-interests paradigm might seem to be normatively attractive in certain hard cases, but it ultimately risks undermining patient autonomy and leading to ableist assumptions in the absence of a more demanding, procedurally sound account of substituted judgment and safeguards. CC BY-SA 4.0 dignity Euthanasia Indian Constitution Indian Supreme Court Max Steinbeis Verfassungsblog gGmbH Verfassungsblog 2366-7044 https://verfassungsblog.de/harish-rana-v-union-of-india/ raw object