What is meant by judicial legislation? In this context, discuss the verdicts of the apex court allowing "passive euthanasia" and…

Judicial legislation refers to courts laying down binding norms and procedural guidelines, under Articles 141 and 142, to fill a legislative vacuum where Parliament has not acted, as in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997). End-of-life care is a leading example.

Evolution on Euthanasia and Living Wills

Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996): A Constitution Bench held that Article 21 does not include a right to die, distinguishing suicide from the natural end of life, while leaving dying with dignity open.

Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011): The Court held active euthanasia illegal but permitted passive euthanasia (withdrawing life support) for patients in a permanent vegetative state under an interim mechanism supervised by High Courts and medical boards, though it rejected the plea for Aruna herself.

Common Cause v. Union of India (2018): A five-judge bench held the right to die with dignity to be part of Article 21, legalised passive euthanasia and Advance Medical Directives ("living wills"), and laid down detailed safeguards.

2023 Modification: The Court simplified these guidelines, dropping Judicial Magistrate attestation and making medical-board approval time-bound.

Harish Rana v. Union of India (2026): In March 2026 the Court applied the framework to permit, for the first time, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, including clinically assisted nutrition, for a patient in a permanent vegetative state for over a decade.

Way Forward

Without a parliamentary law, these directions operate as binding law, raising separation-of-powers concerns. Parliament should enact a comprehensive end-of-life statute that balances patient autonomy with safeguards against misuse.