Abstract

Euthanasia has emerged as a crucial topic of discussion in fields including human rights, ethics, health, law, and religion. Generally defined as the deliberate taking of a life to end suffering the right to die with dignity is still up for debate, although the right to life is acknowledged by all. Despite being hotly debated, Active euthanasia is being re-examined in many countries as a valid extension of the right to die with dignity. Where in India the continued criminalization of active euthanasia under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita creates a normative and practical divide between criminal law and constitutional morality, where the Supreme Court has recognized advance directives and passive euthanasia as part of Article 21 guarantee of a dignified life. This abstract makes the case that India should adopt a strictly controlled framework allowing active euthanasia under specific conditions in light of comparative foreign practice i.e. Netherland, Luxembourg, Australia and Canada. A controlled form of active euthanasia would align India's constitutional values to dignity, autonomy, and physical integrity with international human rights discourse, given the country's pluralistic society and resource-constrained healthcare system. In order to reframe euthanasia as an exercise of dignified self-determination at the end of life rather than as the destruction of life, this Article suggests a rights-based, safeguards-driven legislative framework for active euthanasia that draws from international best practices while remaining sensitive to Indian social, cultural, and religious contexts.

Keywords