The Bench, led by Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan, ruled that the "best interest of the patient" overrides the mechanical prolongation of life.

As the case moves from the courtroom to AIIMS, New Delhi, many are asking how this process actually works and how India's laws compare to the rest of the world.

What is the medical process for passive euthanasia?

Unlike active euthanasia, which involves a lethal injection, passive euthanasia is the "withholding or withdrawal" of life-sustaining medical intervention. For Harish Rana, the process involves a transition from curative care to palliative care.

Doctors will systematically stop the use of "extraordinary" measures. This includes turning off ventilators or withholding high-dose medications for infections.

The most significant part of the Rana verdict is the authorised withdrawal of the feeding tube. Justice Viswanathan noted that nutrition administered via a tube is a "medical treatment" and can be stopped if it no longer benefits the patient.

The patient is not left to suffer. Palliative specialists administer sedatives and painkillers to ensure there is no gasping for breath or physical distress as the body's systems naturally shut down over several days.

Is there a difference between "Killing" and "Letting Die"?

The Indian legal system draws a sharp moral and legal line here. Passive euthanasia is legally seen as "letting nature take its course" because the underlying injury (in Rana's case, a 2013 fall) is the actual cause of death.

Active euthanasia, which is the deliberate act of a doctor to end a life (such as a lethal injection), remains strictly illegal in India. The court emphasised that while we can stop "artificial" life, we cannot actively "cause" death.

Where is euthanasia currently legal globally?

As of 2026, the world is divided on "Right to Die" laws. While India only allows the passive form, several other nations have moved toward full legalization.