New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said the pastor’s body, which has been lying in the mortuary since January 7, should get a decent burial and the controversy regarding his burial should end, saying “we want that there should be an amicable solution to this problem. We do not want to escalate it”.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma was hearing a plea of Ramesh Baghel, challenging an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which disposed of his plea seeking burial of his father in the area specified for Christian burials in his village graveyard.
During the hearing, the bench observed that there could be a designated place for burial inside the village. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Chhattisgarh government, regarding the village burial ground where the petitioner wanted to bury his father, replied that the site is exclusively for tribal Hindu persons and not for Christians.
The bench expressed surprise over the sudden objection of the Hindu tribals, and pointed out that for years nobody raised objections to the burials of persons from both communities together.
Justice Nagarathna said the objection was raised by some persons otherwise there was no problem at all. “Until this incident, there was no other…why suddenly?”, said Justice Nagarathna. Another counsel said in the Bastar area in multiple villages this issue is arising. Mehta said possibly lordships in my mind have this assumption that it has happened since last one year, and added, “even during earlier governments….this has been objected throughout the state”.
Mehta said there is a simple solution, as we are facing this attempt at state-level and added, “we do not wish to escalate it….we will take the dead body in our ambulance with police protection. We will provide all logistics support. Let this not become the beginning of a huge public order issue in the state”.
Justice Nagarathna said, “you must understand that the petitioner's father has been in morgue since January 7…now it is not just a decent burial for a person who is dead. We want an amicable settlement and decent burial (to end this controversy)….we want that there should be an amicable solution to this problem. We do not want to escalate it”.
Mehta said there are several villages where the number of Hindu population is less therefore there is no separate village-wise Hindu crematorium also, and added that it is one crematorium for four-five villages. “Let the man have a decent burial….”, observed the bench
Mehta contended that burial should take place in the designated area for the Christian tribals which was located about 20 kilometres away from the family's Chhindawada village.
Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for Baghel, said the state's affidavit claiming it was a tradition for Christian tribals to go outside the village for burial, was a lie.
After placing on record revenue maps of the village, Gonsalves contended that there were many cases in which the community members were buried in the village itself.
After hearing submissions, the apex court reserved its verdict in the matter.
The high court, relying on a certificate issued by the gram panchayat's sarpanch that there were no separate burial grounds for Christians, had denied the permission for burial to the son underlining it could cause unrest and disharmony in the public at large.
The pastor died due to old age. According to Baghel, Chhindawada village had a graveyard which was verbally allotted by the gram panchayat for burial and cremation of bodies.
In the graveyard, separate areas were demarcated for burial of tribals; burial or cremation of people belonging to Hindu religion and for persons belonging to the Christian community. The plea said the petitioner and his family members wanted to hold the man's last rites and bury his mortal remains in the area specified for Christian persons in the graveyard.
