A Distinction between Letting Die and Killing: Critical Analysis of its Legal Coherence in India

Distinction between “killing” and “letting die” is occupying a central yet contested position in medical jurisprudence and also in constitutional law. In India, this distinction has been judicially constructed for navigating the complex terrain of euthanasia, end-of-life decision-making, and the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution. While active euthanasia remains unlawful, passive euthanasia is being conditionally recognised through some judicial pronouncements. The article critically examines whether the distinction is legally coherent or merely a logical compromise. By examining various landmark decisions, the paper tries to explore the doctrinal foundations, philosophical critiques, and practical implications. It argues that although the distinction serves protective purposes, it is conceptually delicate and produces inconsistent outcomes.