New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday said it was pained to see that a man has to come before it for burial of his father as per Christian rites in a Chhattisgarh village after the authorities failed to resolve the issue, and observed, “what was happening all these decades and years…what was the position all these decades and years. Why is the objection being raised only now?”
The matter came up before a bench comprising justices B V Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma. "Why should a person who has lived in a particular village be not buried in that village? The body has been lying in the morgue since January 7. Sorry to say that a man has to come to the Supreme Court for burial of his father”, said the bench.
“We are sorry to say that neither the Panchayat, nor the state government or the high court was able to resolve this problem. We are surprised by the high court's remark that there will be a law and order problem. We are pained to see that a person is unable to bury his father and has to come to the Supreme Court," said the bench.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing the Chhattisgarh government, contended that there was no burial ground for Christians and the man could be buried in a place 20 kilometres away from the village.
The apex court was hearing a plea filed by Ramesh Baghel, who moved the apex court challenging Chhattisgarh High Court order. The high court had disposed of his plea seeking burial of his father, a pastor, in the area specified for the burial of Christians in the village graveyard. Baghel said while villagers had "aggressively objected" to the burial, police threatened him with legal action.
During the hearing today, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing Baghel, said the affidavit submitted by the state showed his family members were also buried in the village and the deceased was not being allowed the burial as he was Christian.
Mehta said the son was adamant to bury his father in the burial ground of his family's native village to create unrest between tribal Hindus and tribal Christians. Mehta said he will file a better affidavit and there is something more, and it is not an individual case.
Objecting to Mehta, Gonsalves said any person who has converted to Christianity is not allowed to be buried in the graveyard and this is the principle he wants to establish. Mehta said that is Article 25. Gonsalves said the deceased was a tribal Christian. “They want to start at an all-India level and we want it to be decided….”, said Mehta.
Gonsalves said the father of the petitioner died and he wanted to bury his mortal remains in the area specified for Christian persons in the village graveyard and all his ancestors and relatives are buried.
He added that the villagers say since you have converted to Christianity, therefore the burial will not be allowed. Mehta requested the court to take up the matter tomorrow and added, “let this not be decided in this fashion….”.
Gonsalves, who apparently got angry after Mehta objected to his submissions, said do not treat him like an untouchable only because the person had converted and that is not the way to do things. Replying to Gonsalves, Mehta said, “everyone is converted and all Christians are converted. Why are you getting angry…why are you getting agitated. Nobody is an original Christian”.
Justice Nagarathna said the body has been in the morgue since January 7, what is the resolution? Gonsalves made it clear that his client does not want to bury his father outside the village. Mehta said we were not on individual cases but this is the beginning of a movement.
“What was happening all these decades and years…what was the position all these decades and years. Why is the objection being raised only now?”, asked Justice Nagarathna. Another counsel, representing the Chhattisgarh government, said a battleground is chosen and it is the burial of the person after death. “Real issue is that some agenda driven petition….”, said the counsel.
Justice Nagarathna said if there was no objection from the villagers, quietly he would have gone and buried and there would have been no case or objection. Mehta said his petition said there is an objection from the villagers and Article 25, is subject to public order. “For centuries there has been no objection…”, said Justice Nagarathna.
Mehta replied that is wrong.
Gonsalves, agreeing with the observation of the bench, said, “for long years, 20 years. My grandfather in the same village graveyard…2007, first burial, my aunt in 2015, second burial, and my uncle in 2013, and now aunt again in peace and quiet. Christians with their crosses..... They were all allowed to go and now they are trying to create a dangerous precedent. If you convert, you have to go out of the village”.
Mehta requested the court to hear the case tomorrow or day after, and he will file a better affidavit. The bench pointed at the counter affidavit of the state government. Mehta replied that he was not aware of it and gram sabha will have to file a counter, and the people of the village are also here and they would have to be heard.
Justice Nagarathna observed that the court can permit and let them go and bury, and the matter will come to an end. Mehta urged the court to not adjudicate the matter in a hurried way and, citing Article 25, added it is not meant to create chaos.
“Court has not been granting resolution to this problem and the matter has to travel all the way (up to the apex court)….”, said Justice Nagarathna. Mehta said the resolution is that whatever Christians in your village are doing he should do that.
“In the name of law and order, writ petition is dismissed”, said Justice Nagarathna, citing the high court. Mehta said we cannot permit it to become a movement and it is not about one individual. After hearing submissions, the bench scheduled the matter for further hearing on Wednesday.
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.
