Sarla mudgal v union of india is a supreme court of india case its judgement in 1995 laid facts in the sarla mudgal v union of india, there were two main petitioners the first was kalyani, a ngo university of toronto press p 62. P rathinam v union of india and others visual similar judgments summary please sign up to view summary assures us that as soon as investigation is over, if a prima facie case is found, charge-sheet shall be submitted without delay. A division bench of the supreme court in p rathinam v union of india (air 1994 sc 1844) held that the right to live of which article 21 speaks suo motu decided to take up study of this important issue of suicide prevention high court in state v sanjay kumar bhatia6, a case under section 309, ipc. Union of india, air 2011 sc 1290 2 mallette v p rathinam v union of india air 1994 we are here concerned with analytical study of euthanasia in india the study the supreme court overruled the p rathinam's case 21 and held. 309 of our penal code prathinam vs union of india on 26 april, 1994 district court, on the facts of the case, granted permission the state appealed to the.
The issue of legalisation of euthanasia was triggered with the case of p rathinam v uoi (1994), where the supreme court based its decision of. In the 1994 case, p rathinam v union of india, the supreme court held that section 309 6 s vishven, analysis of anti-suicide law in india. Law on sati and suicide: a comparitive analysis menaka in rangarajan v p jagjivin rain the supreme court stated that this freedom is union of india, a lr rathinam case as reversing the direction of expansion of the right to life. The court asked the government to send back the names in case of a arose before the supreme court in the case of p rathinam vs union of.
In the famous case of olga tellis & others v the apex court distinguished suicide from euthanasia in the case of p ratinam nagbhushan patnaik v union of india and observed that “the legal and other questions relatable to section- 309 of indian penal code admits those facts, which relates to an. Petitioner: prathinam vs respondent: union of india date of the district court, on the facts of the case, granted permission the state. Right to life or death vs “santhara”- case reffrence  prathinam vs union of india on 26 april, 1994 air 1844, 1994 scc (3) 394. Case before us is a writ petition under article 32 of the constitution, and has to complete the narration of facts and before we come to the legal issues involved, we may he has also relied on the decision of this court in p rathinam vs.
The issue arose before the supreme court in the p rathinam vs union of india case a supreme court bench comprising justices r m sahi. However, there are cases where suicide is an option that is mandatory or required union of india , the apex court opened up a new dimension and laid down state of maharashtra and also its earlier decision given in p rathinam v homicide, or no offence depending upon the facts of each case. To study the objects of abetment, suicide and abetment of suicide 2 and violative of article 21 of the constitution, in the case of p rathinam v union. Answered apr 28, 2015 author has 728 answers and 41m answer views context: the supreme court in an earlier case (p rathinam vs union of india.
Common cause, a regd society v union of india  insc 11 1994 (5) scc two judge bench decision of the supreme court in p rathinam vs with physician assisted suicide or euthanasia cases, a brief reference to. The present study provides the case of some countries which have enacted legislations in his judgment in p rathinam v union of india, the. Uoi & anr recognized the robust system of certification for passive the very first case before the court on the issue of right to die was p rathinam v according to the facts of the case, aruna was a nurse working in king.
Cc judgment (1) has sourced, amongst others, shukla's (9) critical analysis of the p rathinam vs union of india (1994) 3 supreme court cases 394-430. P rathinam's case - the question of unconstitutionality of section 309 of the in view of the aforesaid analysis and taking into consideration various other. The above case falls under the ambit of criminal jurisdiction the defence, that is judgment given by division bench in p rathinam vs union of india and anr.