Indian Journal for Research in Law and Management

Advancing Law and Management

ISSN No. : 2583-9896

THE RIGHT TO DIE WITH DIGNITY: EXAMINING BODILY AUTONOMY, THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF PASSIVE EUTHANASIA IN POST-PUTTASWAMY INDIA

Cite this Article

Priya Ray (2026). THE RIGHT TO DIE WITH DIGNITY: EXAMINING BODILY AUTONOMY, THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF PASSIVE EUTHANASIA IN POST-PUTTASWAMY INDIA. The Indian Journal for Research in Law and Management, Volume III(Issue 9). Retrieved from https://ijrlm.com/journal/the-right-to-die-with-dignity-examining-bodily-autonomy-the-right-to-privacy-and-the-constitutional-validity-of-passive-euthanasia-in-post-puttaswamy-india/

Abstract

The constitutional right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to encompass a life lived with dignity, meaning, and personal autonomy. The question of whether this guarantee extends to the manner of one's death, specifically through the withdrawal of life-sustaining medical treatment, has occupied the Indian judiciary for several decades and has acquired renewed constitutional force following the nine-judge Constitution Bench's landmark ruling in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), which unanimously recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution. The five-judge Constitution Bench's ruling in Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) constitutes the most authoritative judicial articulation of the right to die with dignity in Indian law, validating passive euthanasia and advance medical directives as exercises of the fundamental rights to life, privacy, and bodily autonomy. This paper undertakes a comprehensive evaluation of the constitutional foundations, philosophical underpinnings, and practical limitations of this framework. It examines the doctrinal evolution from P. Rathinam to Gian Kaur to Common Cause, analyses the privacy jurisprudence of Puttaswamy and its implications for end-of-life decision-making, and engages with comparative constitutional frameworks from the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States. The paper argues that while the Common Cause framework represents a significant constitutional advance, it falls short in several respects: the advance directive regime is procedurally burdensome, Parliament has not enacted the requisite implementing legislation, and the active-passive euthanasia distinction merits critical re-examination. The paper concludes by identifying the institutional and legislative reforms needed to give substantive content to the right to die with dignity in post-Puttaswamy India.

Journal Information

The Indian Journal for Research in Law and Management
ISSN No.
2583-9896
Submit Manuscript
Licensing
All research articles published in The Indian Journal for Research in Law and Management are fully open-access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download, and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJRLM or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJRLM.

Article Analytics

5
Page Views
0
Downloads