Right To Die
According to Article 21 of the Indian Constitution of 1950 no person shall be deprived of his or her life or personal liberty unless in accordance with the procedures established by law.
The Supreme Court of India concluded in the case of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India that the right to life enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is not only a physical right, but it also encompasses the right to live with human dignity as part of its purview. The case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India contains another another comprehensive formulation of the right to live with dignity, in which it characterises Article 21 as the "heart of basic rights." In this judgement, Justice Bhagwati stated that it is the fundamental right of every citizen of India to live with human dignity, free of exploitation, and that this is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.
The right to life encompasses the right to live in accordance with human dignity, which means that such a right must exist until the end of natural life is reached. It is a fundamental natural right of human beings, a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which is found in Part III of the Constitution. The subject of whether the right to life encompasses the right to die or the right to choose not to live has been discussed in a number of situations.
Death is defined as the cessation of life and can be divided into two categories:
Death as a result of natural causes
Unnatural causes of death
The desire for death is completely reasonable for a human being when his or her existence becomes unbearably agonising and terrible in comparison to death itself. In the case of Common Cause vs. Union of , when establishing the relationship between life and death, the Honorable Justice DY Chandrachud declared that life and death are inextricably linked. On every single day of our existence, our bodies are subjected to a process of constant change. A large number of cells die as new ones regenerate, demonstrating that life is not divorced from death. To be is to die, in the same way that death is the sole certainty that exists in life. A philosophical standpoint holds that life and death are indistinguishable from one another and that both are necessary parts in the unstoppable cycle of existence.
Examining the concept of the right to die
Following the Hohfeldian approach to this right, the jural correlatives that are brought to the query will be right and duty, with each right having a corresponding obligation in accordance with the principle of Hohfeldian analysis of rights. This alludes to the idea that if X has the right to die, then Y has the obligation to murder him, which, as we all know, is not always the case. The murdering or murder of another person is criminal under sections 300 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which was enacted in 1860. And it becomes necessary to consider what constitutes the right to die in this context:
The Indian judiciary looked into this topic and discovered a number of cases that dealt with Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with the instigation of suicide, among other things. Following the foregoing logic, if the right to die means that X has the right to commit suicide and that Y will be obligated to assist him in doing so, this is not the correct conclusion to reach.
It is only seriously ill patients or their families that have the authority to determine whether to withdraw life support and allow the person to die quietly and with dignity in India, according to the country's legal definition. If X has the right to die with dignity once he has been diagnosed with an incurable illness, then Y or the state has the obligation to allow him to exercise that right.
The state of India has overturned Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code (1860), declaring it to be arbitrary, and as a result, it has removed the previous sentence for persons who attempted suicide. The state does not encourage suicide; rather, it simply refrains from criminalising it while taking into consideration issues relating to mental health and well-being. According to a philosopher named John Locke, every individual has the right to life, liberty, and property. Following the same logic, arguments arise that if an individual has been granted the absolute right to life, then that individual must also be granted the right to choose to die or end their life in the event of illness or other circumstances beyond their control.