UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — SC to decide today on plea for passive euthanasia

Q1. How many judges constituted the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Common Cause v. Union of India (2018), which recognised the Right to Die with Dignity as a fundamental right?

  • A. Three
  • B. Five
  • C. Seven
  • D. Nine

Q2. With reference to the Supreme Court's 2023 modifications to the 2018 passive euthanasia guidelines, consider the following statements: 1. The 2023 order dispensed with the requirement of attestation of a living will by a Judicial Magistrate of First Class, allowing attestation by a notary or a gazetted officer. 2. The 2023 order abolished the requirement of constituting a secondary medical board that had been introduced under the 2018 guidelines. 3. Unlike the 2018 framework, the 2023 order for the first time permitted active euthanasia in cases of terminal illness. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The 2023 order dispensed with the requirement of attestation of a living will by a Judicial Magistrate of First Class, allowing attestation by a notary or a gazetted officer.
  2. The 2023 order abolished the requirement of constituting a secondary medical board that had been introduced under the 2018 guidelines.
  3. Unlike the 2018 framework, the 2023 order for the first time permitted active euthanasia in cases of terminal illness.
  • A. 1 only
  • B. 1 and 2 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q3. Which of the following was the FIRST judgment in which the Supreme Court of India permitted passive euthanasia in principle, laying down interim guidelines pending legislation?

  • A. P. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994)
  • B. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996)
  • C. Aruna Shanbaug v. Union of India (2011)
  • D. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018)

Q4. With reference to the Supreme Court's order of 11 March 2026 in the Harish Rana case (the first court-approved passive euthanasia in India), consider the following features attributed to the order: 1. It held that clinically administered nutrition and hydration through feeding tubes constitutes medical treatment that may be withdrawn. 2. It waived the mandatory 30-day reconsideration period prescribed by the existing passive euthanasia guidelines. 3. It legalised active euthanasia by lethal injection for patients in a Permanent Vegetative State. 4. It directed the patient's transfer to AIIMS, New Delhi for palliative care during the withdrawal of treatment. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. It held that clinically administered nutrition and hydration through feeding tubes constitutes medical treatment that may be withdrawn.
  2. It waived the mandatory 30-day reconsideration period prescribed by the existing passive euthanasia guidelines.
  3. It legalised active euthanasia by lethal injection for patients in a Permanent Vegetative State.
  4. It directed the patient's transfer to AIIMS, New Delhi for palliative care during the withdrawal of treatment.
  • A. 3 only
  • B. 1 and 3
  • C. 2 and 4
  • D. 1, 2 and 4

Q5. The five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court that delivered the Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) judgment, recognising passive euthanasia and living wills under Article 21, was headed by which of the following Chief Justices of India?

  • A. CJI J.S. Khehar
  • B. CJI Dipak Misra
  • C. CJI Ranjan Gogoi
  • D. CJI S.A. Bobde