Balancing Faith And Law: The Jurisprudential Conflict Over Santhara

Chhavi Mehta

doi:10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i05.56860

Balancing Faith And Law: The Jurisprudential Conflict Over Santhara

Author(s)	Ms. Chhavi Mehta
Country	India
Abstract	This research article focuses on the complex legal and ethical conflict surrounding Santhara, a Jain religious ritual of voluntary fasting to death. We analyse how this practice has become a major point of contention in Indian jurisprudence, particularly its clash with the constitutional right to life (Article 21) and the freedom of religion (Articles 25 and 26). The paper traces the evolution of the "right to die" doctrine, from the landmark P. Rathinam case to the precedent-setting Aruna Shanbaug verdict, and how these decisions shaped the legal landscape. A central focus is the Nikhil Soni v. Union of India case, where the Rajasthan High Court controversially banned Santhara by equating it with suicide. We explore the strong opposition from the Jain community and the Supreme Court's subsequent stay on the order, which left the practice's legal status unresolved. The research then shifts to the critical and emotionally charged Viyana Jain case, where a three-year-old child's death during the ritual introduced a new way to the debate: the supremacy of a child's right to life and protection. The study argues that while a clear distinction must be made between Santhara and suicide, the law must create strict safeguards for vulnerable individuals, especially children. It proposes that life-ending religious rituals for minors should be explicitly and definitively banned, with legal frameworks like the Juvenile Justice Act and the BNS used to criminalize the act and hold all facilitators accountable. The conclusion calls for a complex legal approach that respects Santhara as a dignified religious practice for consenting adults while prioritizing the fundamental safety and rights of children, ensuring that the principles of faith, law, and human dignity can coexist.
Keywords	Santhara, Jainism, Right to Life (Article 21), Freedom of Religion (Articles 25 & 26), Indian Jurisprudence, Nikhil Soni v. Union of India, Viyana Jain Case, Suicide, Juvenile Justice Act, Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),Children's Rights, P. Rathinam Case, Aruna Shanbaug Verdict
Published In	Volume 7, Issue 5, September-October 2025
Published On	2025-09-30
DOI	https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i05.56860

View / Download PDF File

E-ISSN 2582-2160

doi

CrossRef DOI is assigned to each research paper published in our journal.

IJFMR DOI prefix is
10.36948/ijfmr

Downloads

Research Paper Format Copyright Permission Form and Undertaking Form Cover Page Vol 8 Isu 2 Cover Page Vol 8 Isu 1 Cover Page Vol 7 Isu 6

All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.

CC-BY-SA

About IJFMR Fees & Payment Current Issue Publication Archive	Submit Research Paper Track Submission Status Publication Guidelines Publication Ethics Peer Review & Plagiarism	Join as a Reviewer Editors & Reviewers Reviewer Referral Program Get Reviewer Membership Certi.	Website/Journal Policies Usage Policy Content Policies Privacy Policy

Contact Us		+91-9687-828-838	editor@ijfmr.com

International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research

A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal

Balancing Faith And Law: The Jurisprudential Conflict Over Santhara

Share this