Open Access Research Article
EFFECT OF GLOBALISATION ON THE CONCEPT OF EUTHANASIA
Published Paper
Article Details
EFFECT OF GLOBALISATION ON THE CONCEPT OF EUTHANASIA
AUTHORED BY
- PRIYANKA
LLM (Batch
2023-24)
IILM,
GREATER NOIDA
EUTHANASIA
ABSTRACT
This term paper is prepared to
analyze the Law of euthanasia in Indian and the World. Euthanasia is a very burning and debatable issue in the world
because this issue is linked with the human life. This term paper is prepared
on the legal framework and precedence in india and world. Object of this paper
to analyze what can be further improvement in legal aspect and how the
euthanasia is necessary for the patient terminally ill or in a vegetative
state. This paper will analyze a journey of euthanasia, how it started and it
has been settled to some extent In India and World. This paper will also
analyze what are the legal hurdle before the concept of Euthanasia. This paper
will not only discuss euthanasia in human perspective but also in respect of
animal.
The purpose of this research paper is also to analyse the status of
euthanasia in the world and impact of international laws and judgments of
foreign countries on the Indian law and Indian Judiciary. In my view, judicial
globalization has not only helped to Link the world but also helped in access
of foreign legal materials which has now become much easier on account of the
development of information and communication technology, it has also did the
help in cross- fertilization of ideas amongst students, scholars, professors
and Jurists, they have got chance to engage with other foreign countries and
share ideas of development of laws. From India, students used to go Foreign
Countries for higher studies in law, which has resulted in innovation in law.
Being the sovereign country, though international law and decisions are
not binding on India, but same has the persuasive nature on the Indian Law and
Judiciary. Many provisions and clauses of Indian Law and Constitution has been
borrowed from foreign country with some modification. In the era of
globalization, I am of the view that judicial dialogues should not be suspended
between countries, it is correct that there is no doubt that foreign precedent
do not have binding nature on Indian Judiciary, but to some extent it helps to
improve laws. These precedents are of high persuasive value.
Through this research work, I will also touch the concept of animal
euthanasia, which is not new but but also not developed concept in India and
World. Clinical trial on animals, demands animal euthanasia. Because for our
benefits, for human wellbeing, we can not leave animals in deserted situation
for dying. Not only clinical trial, but disaster, outbreak, old age etc also
demands animal euthanasia, which is not
painful for animals. By animal euthanasia, human tries to alleviating the
suffering of animals.
INTRODUCTION
“‘Euthanasia’ or mercy killing or
dignified killing dealing with the concept of causing or hastening of death
particularly of incurable or terminally ill patients on voluntary request is
one of the most perplexing issues which the judiciary and the legislatures all
over the world have been facing today”.[1] It
has been a long journey in respect of Right to Die and Euthanasia in India. In
“P. Rathinam v. Union of India”, Supreme Court held that Article 21 of The
Indian Constitution i.e. “Right to live” includes “Right not to live”[2].
Court also held:
·
Suicide attempt has no beneficial effects on society
i.e. not affecting the society. But this holding has counter arguments. Suicide
affects mentally to family. They have emotions with the person who commits
suicide or want to be euthanized.
·
Act of suicide is not against public policy, religion,
or morality.
But the Judgment was overruled by
Supreme Court itself by Bench consisting of Five Judges namely Justice Verma,
G. N. Ray, N. P. Singh, Faizen Uddin and G. T. Nanavati, in [3]Giyan
Kaur v Sate. of Punjab. Supreme Court overruled the [4]P.
Rathinam v Union of India and held it does not include “right to die”. In recent past, right to die and euthanasia
has been a controversial issues for legalizing the same. Euthanasia is controversial because it
includes the deliberate killing of the patients on his or his relative
request. This issue came before the
Supreme Court in [5]Aruna
shanbaugh v Union of India case. The apex court, in its landmark judgment laid
the founding stone for the Passive Euthanasia.
“I die for Death, Death knocks, but
comes not”[6]
These were the opening words which
struck to the mind of Justice Markandey Katju while delivering the landmark
judgment in Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaugh Case. The court granted the passive
euthanasia in India. Euthanasia is one of the most debatable and discussable
issues which world is facing today. The “euthanasia” word has taken the origin
from the ‘Greek’’ word, and means ‘Good Death’.
EUTHANASIA
CATEGORIES:
·
Voluntary
Euthanasia.
·
Non
Voluntary Euthanasia (e.g. In coma or not able to give consent).
·
Involuntary
Euthanasia
§ Passive
Euthanasia.
§ Active
Euthanasia.
Passive Euthanasia:
·
e.g. dialysis patient, not giving the dialysis to
patient,
·
Life saving medicines withdrawn i.e. antibiotics
·
In cancer, chemotherapy not done etc.
·
In TB, medicines not given.
·
In AIDS, anti retroviral medicines withdrawn.
The whole world is looking towards
the concept of Passive Euthanasia. Active Euthanasia is an offence and
punishable in all over the world except where it is specifically made legal. In
India “active euthanasia” has been proscribed under Indian Penal Code by
Section 302 (Murder) or at least 304 (“Culpable Homicide”) of the Code as the
case may be. But in most of the country passive euthanasia and physician assisted
suicide euthanasia concept has been accepted and legalized by the law.
Passive Euthanasia:
Basically there is withdrawal of life
supporting system. Justice A. K. Sikri in Common Cause v Union of India (Supra)
has termed life supporting system with a phrase ‘Prolongs life with no
dignity.’
LEGAL
ASPECTS IN INDIA: LAW AND PRECEDENCE
There is no statutory provision in
our country as to the legal procedure for withdrawing life support to a person
in a permanent vegetative state or who is otherwise incompetent to take a
decision in this connection. The constitution bench of Supreme Court in “Gian
Kaur v. State of Punjab” held that euthanasia and assisted suicide are not
lawful in India. The Court held that euthanasia could be made lawful only by
Legislature.
“In [7]Aruna
Ramchandra, Supreme Court observed that passive euthanasia should be permitted
in our country in certain situations. A decision has to be taken to discontinue
life support either by the parents or the spouse or other close relatives, or in
the absence of any of them, such a decision can be taken even by a person or a
body of persons acting as a next friend. It can be taken by the doctors
attending the patient. However, the decision should be taken bona fide in the
best interest of the patient.”[8]
[9]“The Protagonist of euthanasia on the
view that existence in the persistent vegetative state is not a benefit to the
patients of a terminal illness being unrelated to the principle of ‘sanctity of
life’ or the right to live with dignity is of no assistance to determine the
scope of Article 21 for deciding whether the guarantee of the right to life
therein includes the right to die. The right to life including the right to
live with human dignity would mean the existence of such a right upto the end
of natural life. This also includes the right to a dignified life upto the
point of death including a dignified procedure of death.” 241st Law
commission of India has recommended for the recognition of the Passive
Euthanasia by Law.
ARTICLE 21
OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 6 OF ICCPR, SECTION 309 INDIAN PENAL CODE 1860
In India [10]Article
21 of Indian Constitution gives the right to live with dignity. But this right
does not include “right to die” as held in “Gian Kaur” case (Supra). If someone
commits suicide and survives then he/she will be punished under [11]section
309 of the I.P.C. Other legal aspect for the euthanasia are in section 302 and
304 of the I.P.C. if there is intentional killing of the patient then it is
punishable as murder in 302 or at least under 304. The language of Article 21 of Indian
constitution is different to the Article 6 of ICCPR. Article 6 says “Every
human being has inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived
of his life” In Indian constitution talks about the ‘Procedure established by
law’ and this is nothing but a due process. Due process means devoid of
arbitrariness. Mere making law is not due process or procedure established by
law but it should have some reasoning and reasonable cause behind it. Life in
terrorist and specific offences lifes being taken by state by death penalty
provision. So Article 21 of the constitution is not absolute.
What does arbitrariness means:
·
Individual will or Individual Decision, Judgment
·
Whimsical
·
Discretionary, against the rule of law.
·
Capricious
·
Uncertain
·
Unreasonable/ Unresaonable
·
Uncontrolled by law (Uncontrollable)
·
Abusing unlimited power etc.
So if the law for euthanasia is reasonable,
has been framed with proper guidelines or for the wellbeing of the person then
it is not hit by the Article 21 of Indian constitution or by the Article 6 of
ICCPR. Euthanasia is a debatably concept before the world. But must discussed
and problematic concept is of non voluntary euthanasia. In non voluntary
euthanasia, patient is euthanized against his will. Because in non voluntary
euthanasia, patient is in almost dead state or “vegetative state” or in non
communicating state.
This absentness in consent in non
voluntary euthanasia invites the motive, intentional killing and arbitrariness.
To stop this, there is a need for proper guidelines and norms. Another concept
of euthanasia is physician assisted suicide. This is also punishable in India
under section 306 (Abetment of Suicide) in I.P.C. In Physician Assisted
Suicide, in the presence of witnesses, poisonous substance is given after
satisfying the patient in soundness accepting this.
ASSISTED
SUICIDE:
Assisted Suicide can be done by
lethal Injection as well. After being satisfied that patient is allowing to end
his life. An injection is injected to him or He will be asked to inject the
same in his body himself.
“The Treatment of Terminally Ill
Patients bill, 2016” recognize passive euthanasia and also permits for
physician assisted suicide under clause 5(3). But this act has not been passed
by parliament.
MENTAL
HEALTHCARE ACT 2017:
Section 309 of Indian Penal Code
(Attempt to Suicide) has been a debatable section in the past and current. This
section proscribes and punished the person if he commits the suicide. But
section 115 of the Act has partly diluted this section by giving medical
treatment to the person who survives the suicide.
[12]S. 115: “Presumption of severe stress
in cases of attempt to commit suicide. Sub clause (2) of the Section mandates,
that appropriate government shall have a duty to provide Care, treatment and
rehabilitation to person, having severe stress and who attempted to commit
suicide, to reduce the risk of recurrence of attempt to commit suicide”.
Section 115 starts with a “non
obstante” provision, reference to S. 309 of penal code.
Section 115 (1)[13]
“Notwithstanding anything contained in section 309 of the Indian Penal Code any
person who attempts to commit suicide shall be presumed, unless proved
otherwise, to have severe stress and shall not be tried and punished under the
said Code.”
So there will be a “Shall Presumption”, unless
contrary proved. This presumption is rebuttable.
After
mental health bill, now state has responsibility to treat survival of suicide
to give mental treatment. Mental Healthcare Act has decriminalized the attempt
to die by suicide, thereby reducing further stress on the survival/victim. It
is pertinent to mention that in recent introduced bill for the replacement of
Indian Penal Code, 1860, by The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, attempt to
suicide provision has been deleted and new provision for attempts to commit
suicide with the intent to compel or restrain any public servant from
discharging his official duty has been proscribed.
CURRENT
POSITION IN INDIA
“Bench In the Common Cause v Union
India, held that Right to live with dignity also includes the smoothening of
the process of dying in a case of a terminally ill patient or a person in
Persistent vegetative state with no hope of recovery. Living will is a written
document that allows a patient to give explicit instructions in advance about
the medical treatment to be administered when he or she is terminally ill or no
longer able to express informed consent.”[14]
[15]Common Cause v Union of India
·
5 Judges bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court comprising of
Hon’ble Justices Dipak Mishra C.J, A.K Sikri, D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan
and A.M. Khanwilkar, JJ unanimously delivered the landmark judgment authored by
Justice Deepak Misra and held the concept of “Advance Directive” for the
Passive Euthanasia.
·
Living Will this is also termed as “Advance
Directive”. Directions in advance.
·
This “Advance Directive” shall be witnessed to two
witnesses before the Judicial Magistrate of first class. Judicial magistrate
shall attest the same and shall be signed by him also.
·
When case will appear- Medical board- Head of
Particular department will prepare the report regarding the passive euthanasia,
whether to allow it or not. This medical board shall be comprised of at least
four experts.
·
This report (Whether negative or positive) will be
sent to collector of the concerned district.
·
Collector will form the separate medical board.
·
This separate medical board will decide whether to
allow the euthanasia or not. (If denied
then remedy is to go under Article 226 of the indian constitution by way of
writ). Because it has been held that “Right to Die includes Right to die with
dignity.”
·
Report of the medical board formed by Collector shall
be final. So if it is in affirmative action, then execution would be by State.
i.e. State Kiling. Ultimately state is vested with power to allow the
euthanasia or not. Hospital Medical Borad will act as only advisory board.
Whether to allow it or not. Ultimately collector’s medical board is the final
authority.
·
Now recently Constitutional Bench of Hon’ble Supreme
court of India comprising of K. M. Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose,
Hrishikesh Roy, C T Ravikuma, JJr has modified these guidelines for making it
less cumbersome for citizens. The SC has simplified these guidelines. Hon’ble
Supreme court has modified the guideline that the attestation of living will
can be done by a notary or a gazetted officer to be sufficient for its
validity, earlier it was suppose to attested by Judicial Magistrate and
countersigned by him only. Furthermore, now records of living will shall be
part of national health record and accessed by Indian hospitals, earlier it was
kept district court concerned. Now primary board to assess the health and
condition of the patients shall be comprised of 3 doctors, including treating
physician and two other doctors with five years of experiences in the
specialty, earlier it was comprised of at least four experts from general
medicine, cardiology, neurology, nephrology, psychiatry, or oncology with
overall standing of at least 20 years. Now, primary and secondary board has to
take decision within 48 hours, earlier there was no time limit for decision on
withdrawal of life supporting system. Now secondary board has to be formed by
hospital with medical experts, earlier collector concerned had been given
responsibility and hospital board opinion was advisable only in nature. After
this recent modification, euthanasia procedure has become less cumbersome and
less time taking and state through collector has not been given power for
killing patient.
TYPES OF
EUTHANASIA
·
Child
Euthanasia.
·
Euthanasia
in pregnant woman: when there is threat to mother or child. The Medical
Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1973.
·
Mental
patients Euthanasia
·
Adult
patients Euthanasia
·
Euthanasia
Animal.
NEW CONCEPT
OF ANIMAL EUTHANASIA
Euthanasia- Animal: Our debate and discussion has been confined only to
the euthanasia with respect to Human Being only. But a new concept has been
evolved in European Country i.e. Animal Euthanasia. After, during or before use
in testing, animal may be euthanized. For medical research, gene editing, drug
testing, animals are the first subject. Before the successful testing or
research it causes the deformity in the animal body. And ultimately they die
with painful death. To stop such painful prolong death euthanasia is necessary.
HOW ANIMAL
EUTHANAISED
·
BY: intravenous injection
·
very high dose of Pentobarbital or Sodium (Na+)
thiopental. Or
·
Injecting the drugs directly in heart chamber or body
cavity.
·
Shooting for the big animals, elephant, deer, horse
etc.
·
By gas anaesthetics or
·
By Carbon Dioxide Chamber.
·
Isoflurane and Sevoflurane used to killed small
animals.
Prohibited and Inhumane Methods of Animal Euthanasia
·
Eletrocution- Hanging
·
Stunning
·
Hypothermia
·
Formalin Injection
·
Burning
·
Chloroform
·
Air embolism
·
Cynide administration
·
Chloral hydrate injection
·
Decompression
·
Rapid freezing
But some animal activists has
criticized this euthanasia. They are supporting to eradicate the root cause i.e.
not to allow the animals in medical testing. But this can not be possible in my
opinion. Because for the betterment and scientific development of world and for
human welfare this is necessary to test the medicines on animals. Because
medicines or new research can not be test on human beings directly.
In my opinion, animal euthanasia
should be in a manner which is not painful for them. Painful killing of animals
in the name of animal euthanasia violates their rights, animals are also have
their body, they also have feelings. Animals also have their rights. They have
right to live with no pain, no suffering. They have freedom from hunger and
thirst, discomfort, pain, express normal behavior, and free from fear and
distress. Therefore, animal euthanasia must be performed by qualified
veterinarians/doctors who have understanding of animal behavior, anatomical
landmarks and equipment and drugs used for the humane euthanasia of animals. In
humane killing of animals violates their rights. It has been seen that during
outbreak in birds and animals, they are killing in a brutal manner in inhumane
way with realizing their pain. Inhumane mass killing during out break demands
euthanasia procedure which is less painful.
Why there is need of Animal Euthanasia
·
To stop spread of disease at the time of outbreak
like bird blue, flu, swine flu, corona virus ourtbreak etc.
·
Old age associated disease, poor and bad mobility,
ir-recoverability of normal state and health. It has been seen that old age
pets are usually left on road by family.
·
Incurable disease due to bacteria, virus, fungi etc.,
disease which is contagious, communicable and can spread swiftly.
·
Starvation, inability to consume food, accident
specially street dogs and animals.
·
Animal mutilated during research.
·
Gene editing resulting abnormalities in body of
animals which is incurable.
·
Sufferings after disasters/survival of cyclone,
earthquake, disaster, violence, outbreak etc.
REASON FOR
EUTHANASIA
·
Terminal illness e.g. Cancer.
·
Rabies.
·
Behavioural Problems.
·
Old age
·
Illness and broken limbs
·
Lack of homes
·
Animal Testing
·
Deformed birth e.g. Microcyophelis.
RELIGIOUS
ANGLE
·
Christianity
– says,
§ Euthanasia is a crime and this is an
aggression against the God.
·
Buddhism-
Buddham saranam gacchami
Dhammam saranam gacchami
Sangham saranam gacchami
Buddhism believes in non violence and
asks to go with Buddha, through his non violence path. Buddhism says that
euthanasia is an act against life. Violence against life, crime against life.
·
Jainism- Mahavira varadhamana, explicitly allows a
shravak to end his life for getting the Moksha.
At the religious point of view, self
killing and killing by euthanasia is a violence against God. This is the God
who has created living creature and this is the God has only paramount right to
destroy.
PRINCIPLES
BEHIND EUTHANASIA
·
Injury-
Prolong illness cause the emotional and psychological injury to the family.
If the patient is in a almost dead position from where no return to the normal
human life. Then if euthanasia is not allowed it would caused the psychological
and emotional injury to the near ones.
·
Financial
Loss/Revenue Loss; If a person is in “vegetative state” then in such case
family would have financial burden for his treatment for a long period. Health
Insurance is common for common man. Then in these cases also insurance company
has to bear financial burden for him. A long life without the improvement on
hospital bed not only causes the revenue/ financial loss to the family for life
supporting system but also affects the insurance policy.
·
Organ
donation; can save others life. A dying person can save many others by donating
his/her organs. In the world where humans organs are in big demand and is in
scarce in number. Then in such situations organ donation from the person who is
in vegetative state is a good principle. This has been seen that scientifically
human organs are being developed in animal bodies. Line recent development is in
pancreas case. This has been developed naturally in pig with genes/DNA editing.
But this scientific development has risk factors as well. Organs which are
being developed in animal bodies might get affected with the disease animals
have. So Euthanasia can be a alternative to fulfill the demand of organs. Deficiency
of organs is major problem.
·
Cognative
ability, etc.
“FOREIGN
LAW
|
S.No.
|
Country
|
Assisted Suicide
|
Suicide
|
Euthanasia
|
|
1.
|
Netherland
|
Legal (Medical Assisted)
|
-
|
Legal
|
|
2.
|
Switzerland
|
Legal (Medical Assisted)
|
Illegal
|
-
|
|
3.
|
Belgium
|
Legal
|
-
|
Legal
|
|
4.
|
Egypt
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
5.
|
Myanmar
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
|
6.
|
Rwanda
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
7.
|
South Sudan
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
|
8.
|
South Africa
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
9.
|
Sudan
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
|
10.
|
Canada
|
Legal
|
Legal
|
Legal
|
|
11.
|
USA
|
Legal (Some States)
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
12.
|
Bangladesh
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
Illegal
|
|
13.
|
Bhutan
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
14.
|
India
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Legal (Passive)
|
|
15.
|
Belgium
|
Legal
|
Legal
|
Legal
|
|
16.
|
UK
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Legal (Passive)
|
|
17.
|
Australia
|
Legal (Victoria State)
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
18.
|
New Zeeland
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Illegal
|
|
19.
|
Brazil
|
Illegal
|
Legal
|
Legal
|
|
20.
|
Colombia
|
Legal (Medical Assited)
|
-
|
Legal
|
“
Netherland,
Luxembourg, Belgium allows both euthanasia and assisted suicide for anyone who
faces unbearable suffering that has no chance of improvement and cure and is
irresistible. In united states of America, states have different laws in
different states. Euthanasia has been allowed in Washington, Oregon and
Montana. In Albania, euthanasia is allowed is consented by 3 family members of
the person. In Switzerland, assistant suicide is allowed but same has been
proscribed if done with some selfish motives.
The Right to Life of Animals
With regard to Article
21, the Supreme Court notably held:
“Every species has a
right to life and security, subject to the law of the land, which includes
depriving its life, out of human necessity. Article 21 of the Constitution,
while safeguarding the rights of humans, protects life and the word “life” has
been given an expanded definition and any disturbance from the basic
environment which includes all forms of life, including animal life, which are
necessary for human life, fall within the meaning of Article 21 of the
Constitution. So far as animals are concerned, in our view “life” means
something more than mere survival or existence or instrumental value for human
beings, but to lead a life with some intrinsic worth, honor and dignity.”
Constitutional Safeguards of Animals
Article 48 of Indian
Constitution: “The State shall endeavor to organize agriculture and animal
husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps
for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughterr, of
cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle”.
Article 48 A: “The State
shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the
forests and wildlife of the country”.
Article 51 (g) : “to
protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers
and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures”.
CONCLUSION:
Our debate should not be confined
with respect to human being only. Animals are also the living creature of the
God. Reforms should be made in India not to strengthen law only just to human
euthanasia but also to animal euthanasia. Because animal before, during and
after use in testing are being left with their deformed body.
Passive euthanasia law has been
settled by common cause cause (Supra), but progressive step should be taken
towards active euthanasia as well. Because there are many cases where humans
are living with undignified life without food, home, cloths. I am of the
opinion that right to life with dignity and right to die under article 21 of
The Constitution of India, should be extended for the inclusion of animals.
Under article 21 word ‘person’ has not been prefixed with human, so the
definition of person u/A 21 of Indian Constitution should be extended for
animals also. The Indian constitution is not silent for animal rights. Article
51 of Indian Constitution enshrines the rights of animals and all living
creature. Article 51 of Indian Constitution provides animal protection by guaranteeing
sympathy to every single living creature.
The globalization of judiciary has
resulted in adopting progressive laws in India. In my opinion concept of
euthanasia, which was foreign to India at one point of time, has been accepted
in India with reasonable and rational modifications. Globalization has not
forced India to adopt international laws but this has played great role towards
the improvement and progress in law. Due to persuasive nature of international
law and judgments, foreign precedents and laws are adopted in India with
flexible modification. This is the beauty of globalization that world is now
connect with international law. Municipal law and international law are not
distinct to each other, rather both are in a eclipsed and fertilized situation.
Therefore, in my opinion, influx ideas and inter-fusion of ideas amongst brain
of different countries is necessary for the world. There should be respect of
international law and decisions but subject to keeping in mind the sovereignty
of the nation.
After the recent amendment in the
guidelines of euthanasia passed in Common Cause (Supra) case, I am of the
opinion that now modified guidelines are well less cumbersome and less time
taking as compare to other. Further, there is now less chance of selfish and
intentional killing of patients because primary and secondary boards are
comprising of experts. Nevertheless, without prejudice to the decision of
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, I am worried with the recent modification in
guidelines for attestation part. The power of attestation has been given to
notary officer also. But it has been seen that notary officers are used to do
attestation in a mechanical manner sometimes in the absence of witnesses
without following the prescribes rules of notary act. Because of this,
amendment, there is higher chances of manipulation in the attestation of living
will by the notary. In my opinion there is still scope of amendments in
guidelines and adoption of new guidelines.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Book:
Ritika Bansal, Euthanasia, appeal and
plea for mercy killing, 2014.
Acts
Mental
Healthcare Act, 2017, Act 10 of 2017
The Indian
Constitution of India, 1950.
The Indian
Penal Code, 1860.
Decisions:
o AIR 1962 SC
779
o AIR 1961 SC
o (1993) All
E. R. 82) (H.L.) The Airedale Case.
Aricles:
o The Role of
Foreign Precedents in a Country’s Legal System: Chief Justice K.G.Balakrishnan.
o Euthanasia
for animals: A boon or Hindrance to our Society: By Abhishek Kar & Vanshika Kumar.
Websites
www.livelaw.in
www.indiankanoon.org
www.google.com
Indiankanoon.org
[1] Ritika Bansal, Euthanasia, appeal
& mercy killing.
[2] 1994 SCC (3) 394
[3] JT 1996(3) SC 339
[4] JT 1994(3) SC 392
[5] AIR SC 2011 1290
[6] AIR SC 2011 1290
[7] (2011) 3 SCALE 298 SC
[8] Ibid
[9] Mayank Madhaw, Criminal Law I,
6.36, Singhals Law Publications, Fifth Edition, 2018-19
[10] The Constitution of India 1950.
[11] Indian Penal Code 45 of 1860
[12] Section 115, mental healthcare
Act, 2017, Act 10 of 2017
[13] Ibid
[14] Right to die with dignity, Available
at https://www.livelaw.in/breaking-right-die-dignity-fundamental-right-sc-allows-passive-euthanasia-living-will-issues-guidelines/
(Last Visited on 24 April, 2019)
[15] WP (CIVIL) No. 215/2015
Article Information
EFFECT OF GLOBALISATION ON THE CONCEPT OF EUTHANASIA
Authors: PRIYANKA
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/03/13
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.