The Karnataka High Court has closed a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought enforcement of the Supreme Court’s directions on advance medical directives, commonly known as “living wills”. The decision was taken after the State Government submitted a memo listing steps taken to implement the Supreme Court’s orders.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice N V Anjaria and Justice K V Aravind disposed of the PIL filed by Advocate Shiv Kumar. The bench noted that the petitioner was satisfied with the actions taken by the government to ensure compliance with the directives issued by the apex court.
“The counsel submitted that petitioner stands satisfied with the steps and measures taken as well as orders and circulars issued by the State Government towards compliance of directions issued by the Supreme Court. In the aforesaid view, nothing further survives in the present petition and the same stands disposed off. Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) will also carry out compliance of SC directives for which it is obliged in law,” stated the High Court in its order.
Advance medical directives are legal documents that allow individuals to express their healthcare preferences in case they become unable to make decisions themselves. These documents ensure that a person’s wishes regarding medical treatment and end-of-life care are respected. They also permit the designation of a surrogate decision-maker in advance.
The PIL had urged the Court to ensure enforcement of the Supreme Court’s modified judgment delivered in January 2023 in the case of Common Cause v. Union of India and Another. This judgment revised the earlier 2018 guidelines on living wills after identifying significant obstacles that hindered implementation.
The petition specifically sought directions to appoint a competent officer from local government bodies such as municipal corporations or panchayats. This officer would be responsible for collecting, maintaining, and preserving advance directives. It also asked for the formulation of proper rules or guidelines to enable such officials to discharge their duties effectively.
The 2023 Supreme Court judgment introduced several key changes. It allowed the naming of more than one guardian or close relative in the advance directive document. It mandated that all named individuals must be informed by the treating doctor about the illness, treatment options, and consequences of each option.
“Before a final opinion was formulated by the secondary medical board, and if the executor was incapacitated, the consent of all the nominees would be taken,” the judgment had clarified.
Furthermore, the judgment required the executor to provide copies of the directive to their designated decision-makers and family physician, if any. A copy must also be submitted to the competent officer of the relevant local government authority. That officer would serve as the official custodian of the document.
Additionally, individuals may include their advance directive as part of their digital health records, ensuring accessibility when required.
With the State Government now implementing measures aligned with these requirements and the BBMP also being bound to comply, the High Court found no reason to continue proceedings in the matter.
Case Title: Shiv Kumar vs State of Karnataka & Others
Case Number: WP 22674/2024
