Referred to Larger Bench IV: Katju’s Eccentricity

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

In Common Cause v. UOI, (2014) 5 SCC 338 it was held, “A vivid reading of Para 104 of Aruna Shanbaug, (2011) 4 SCC 454 demonstrates, reasoning in Para 104 is directly inconsistent with observation in Para 101. In Paras 21 & 101 Bench was of view, Constitution Bench in Gian Kaur held, euthanasia could be made lawful only by a legislation. Whereas in Para 104 Bench contradicts its own interpretation of Gian Kaur and states, although this Court approved the view taken in Airedale, it has not clarified who can decide whether life support should be discontinued in case of an incompetent person e.g., a person in coma or PVS. At outset it is interpreted, euthanasia could be made lawful only by legislation. Where is the question of deciding whether life support should be discontinued in case of an incompetent person e.g., a person in coma or PVS? In view of inconsistent opinions rendered in Aruna Shanbaug, it becomes extremely important to have a clear enunciation of law. Thus, in our cogent opinion, the question of law involved requires careful consideration by a Constitution Bench of this Court for benefit of humanity as a whole.”

Do read, Aruna Shanbaug. It is a rare when Judicial Clerks have been acknowledged. One of them, Mr. Manav Kapur, I have had good fortune to meet. I am pleased to share a photograph.

Manav Kapur

We may not be masters of our destiny. Nor can we control what life has in store. What we can determine is how we respond to our trials and tribulations.

Aruna Shanbaug has inherent internal inconsistencies.

– Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Common Cause v. UOI, [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 215 of 2005] decided on 09.03.2018.

The perception in Aruna Shanbaug, Constitution Bench in Gian Kaur approved Airedale, is not correct. Gian Kaur has neither given any definite opinion with regard to euthanasia nor has it stated, same can be conceived of only by a legislation. We unequivocally express, Gian Kaur is not a binding precedent for purpose of laying down, passive euthanasia can be made lawful only by legislation.

It has to be stated without any trace of doubt, right to live with dignity also includes smoothening of process of dying in case of a terminally ill patient or a person in PVS with no hope of recovery.

– Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra, Common Cause v. UOI, [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 215 of 2005] decided on 09.03.2018

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.