# Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others

- **Citation:** 2025 INSC 109
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2025-01-27
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 1235 of 2025
- **Bench:** B.V. Nagarathna, Satish Chandra Sharma
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/ramesh-baghel-v-state-of-chhattisgarh-others-38207
- **Pages:** 37

## Headnote

A plea of a Christian man to accord his father a decent burial in
his own native village.
Headnotes†
Constitution of India - Arts.14 and 15 - Chhattisgarh Panchayat
Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 - Chhattisgarh Gram Panchayat
(Regulating Places for Disposal of Dead Bodies, Carcasses
and other Offensive Matter) Rules, 1999 - Appellant herein is a
christian and belongs to the New Apostolic Church - His family
and ancestors were native residents of village Chhindwada,
Chhattisgarh for generations and belonged to the Mahra caste
or community - The appellant's father, a pastor, passed away
on 07.01.2025 - Appellant wished to accord his father a decent
burial in his own native village - However, the burial was
objected by the fellow villagers - Appellant received no aid
from the State machinery - Appellant filed writ petition before
the High Court - By the impugned order dated 09.01.2025, the
High Court disposed of the writ petition by refusing to grant
relief as prayed for the appellant:
Held: [Per Nagarathna, J.] (i) The appellant permitted to conduct
the funeral rites of his father in his private agricultural land at village
Chhindwada at the earliest; (ii) However, the appellant shall not
take any advantage, legally or otherwise, for having been permitted
to bury his father in his private land; (iii) Since the death of the
appellant's father has given rise to the unsavoury controversy
regarding the place of burial, respondent Nos.3 to 9 directed to
provide adequate security and protection to the appellant and
his family to carry out the funeral rites of his father at his private
* Author
962
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
agricultural land at village Chhindwada at the earliest; (iv) The
implementation of the aforesaid directions to be expedited; (v) The
respondent-State and its local authorities directed to demarcate
exclusive sites as grave yards for burial of Christians throughout
the State in accordance with law; (vi) Although, by consensus,
this Court has issued certain directions as per the Order of the
Court, nevertheless, direction five above shall be complied with
by the respondent-State and its authorities dehors the direction
issued under Article 142 of the Constitution. [Para 1] [Per Satish
Chandra Sharma, J.(dissenting)] (a) The Appellant and his
family be provided with an appropriate site within the Designated
Christian Burial Ground situated at village Karkapal for the burial
of the Deceased's remains; (b) The Respondent State is directed
to ensure that the Appellant and his family are provided with all
ancillary logistical support for the purpose of transferring the
remains of the Deceased from the mortuary at the Medical College
situated at Jagdalpur to Designated Christian Burial Ground
situated at village Karkapal; (c) The Respondent State to grant
the Appellant and his family members adequate police protection
which shall be reviewed by the concerned authorities after a period
of 7 (seven) days; (d) The Respondent State to take adequate
measures to ensure no public order incident takes place at either
village Karkapal or village Chindwada; and (e) The Respondent
State is directed to ensure that the burial of the remains of the
Deceased takes place at the earliest - The Appellant and his
family members are directed to cooperate with the authorities
of the Respondent State who shall handle the situation with the
sensitivity it deserves. [Para 2]
Constitution of India - Art.142 - Directions issued - Appellant,
a Christian wished to accord his father (pastor) a decent burial
in his own native village - However, the burial was objected
by the fellow villagers:
Held: (Per Court) There is no consensus between the members
of this Bench on the place of resting of the appellant's father who
died on 07.01.2025 - Bearing in mind the fact that the deceased
has been kept in mortuary for the last three weeks since 07.01.2025
and in order to accord an expeditious and dignified burial of the
deceased, the following directions in

## Text

_Characters 0–39,900 of 78,985. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39900 for what follows._

[2025] 1 S.C.R. 961 : 2025 INSC 109
Ramesh Baghel
v.
State of Chhattisgarh & Others
(Civil Appeal No. 1235 of 2025)
27 January 2025
[B.V. Nagarathna* and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
A plea of a Christian man to accord his father a decent burial in
his own native village.
Headnotes†
Constitution of India - Arts.14 and 15 - Chhattisgarh Panchayat
Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 - Chhattisgarh Gram Panchayat
(Regulating Places for Disposal of Dead Bodies, Carcasses
and other Offensive Matter) Rules, 1999 - Appellant herein is a
christian and belongs to the New Apostolic Church - His family
and ancestors were native residents of village Chhindwada,
Chhattisgarh for generations and belonged to the Mahra caste
or community - The appellant's father, a pastor, passed away
on 07.01.2025 - Appellant wished to accord his father a decent
burial in his own native village - However, the burial was
objected by the fellow villagers - Appellant received no aid
from the State machinery - Appellant filed writ petition before
the High Court - By the impugned order dated 09.01.2025, the
High Court disposed of the writ petition by refusing to grant
relief as prayed for the appellant:
Held: [Per Nagarathna, J.] (i) The appellant permitted to conduct
the funeral rites of his father in his private agricultural land at village
Chhindwada at the earliest; (ii) However, the appellant shall not
take any advantage, legally or otherwise, for having been permitted
to bury his father in his private land; (iii) Since the death of the
appellant's father has given rise to the unsavoury controversy
regarding the place of burial, respondent Nos.3 to 9 directed to
provide adequate security and protection to the appellant and
his family to carry out the funeral rites of his father at his private
* Author
962
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
agricultural land at village Chhindwada at the earliest; (iv) The
implementation of the aforesaid directions to be expedited; (v) The
respondent-State and its local authorities directed to demarcate
exclusive sites as grave yards for burial of Christians throughout
the State in accordance with law; (vi) Although, by consensus,
this Court has issued certain directions as per the Order of the
Court, nevertheless, direction five above shall be complied with
by the respondent-State and its authorities dehors the direction
issued under Article 142 of the Constitution. [Para 1] [Per Satish
Chandra Sharma, J.(dissenting)] (a) The Appellant and his
family be provided with an appropriate site within the Designated
Christian Burial Ground situated at village Karkapal for the burial
of the Deceased's remains; (b) The Respondent State is directed
to ensure that the Appellant and his family are provided with all
ancillary logistical support for the purpose of transferring the
remains of the Deceased from the mortuary at the Medical College
situated at Jagdalpur to Designated Christian Burial Ground
situated at village Karkapal; (c) The Respondent State to grant
the Appellant and his family members adequate police protection
which shall be reviewed by the concerned authorities after a period
of 7 (seven) days; (d) The Respondent State to take adequate
measures to ensure no public order incident takes place at either
village Karkapal or village Chindwada; and (e) The Respondent
State is directed to ensure that the burial of the remains of the
Deceased takes place at the earliest - The Appellant and his
family members are directed to cooperate with the authorities
of the Respondent State who shall handle the situation with the
sensitivity it deserves. [Para 2]
Constitution of India - Art.142 - Directions issued - Appellant,
a Christian wished to accord his father (pastor) a decent burial
in his own native village - However, the burial was objected
by the fellow villagers:
Held: (Per Court) There is no consensus between the members
of this Bench on the place of resting of the appellant's father who
died on 07.01.2025 - Bearing in mind the fact that the deceased
has been kept in mortuary for the last three weeks since 07.01.2025
and in order to accord an expeditious and dignified burial of the
deceased, the following directions in exercise of powers under
Article 142 of the Constitution of India: (i) The appellant to conduct
the funeral rites and bury his deceased father at the burial ground
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
963
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
at village Karkapal; (ii) The respondent-State and its local authorities
to ensure that the appellant and his family are provided with all
logistical support for the purpose of transferring the body of the
deceased from the mortuary at the Medical College situated in
Jagdalpur to the Christian burial ground situated at village Karkapal,
if so desired by the appellant; (iii) Adequate police protection to
be accorded in this regard; (iv) The respondent-State and its
authorities to ensure that the burial of the deceased father shall
take place at the earliest. [Para 3]
Constitution of India - Arts.14 and 15 - Violation of duty to
ensure burial - Betrayal of the sublime principles of secularism:
Held: [Per Nagarathna, J.] The village Panchayat has abdicated
its duty to ensure burial of appellant's father within a period of
24 hours of his death - The Panchayat has been taking sides -
The affidavit of the ASP, Bastar, stated that any person who has
forsworn the tradition of the community or has converted into a
Christian is not allowed to be buried at the village graveyard - This
declaration by the respondents is unfortunate - It is violation of
Article 14 and Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India which speak
of equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws as
well as places a strict prohibition of discrimination on the ground
of religion, respectively - Attitude on the part of local authorities, at
the village level or higher level, indicates a betrayal of the sublime
principles of secularism. [Paras 22.10, 22.11]
Constitution of India - Arts.21 and 25 - Last rights and
ceremonies - Right to choose place for ceremony:
Held: [Per Satish Chandra Sharma, J.] The fact that procedures
pertaining to last rites; and ceremonies involved, from a part
of the right(s) protected under Part III of the Constitution of
India - However, to claim that such right(s) would encompass
the unqualified right to choose the "place" of such ceremony
(including burial) would prima facie appear to stretch constitutional
limits beyond what was envisaged - It is well settled that right(s)
protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are subject
to "procedure established by law" which is required to be just,
fair and reasonable - Furthermore, the right freely to profess,
practice and propagate religion under Article 25, is ex facie
subject to "public order"; and the Sub-Clause 2 of Article 25
enables the State to frame provisions regulating certain activities
964
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
associated with religious practices - Thus, to claim an absolute
or unqualified right in respect of the exact "place" of burial of a
person under Article 21 and Article 25, prima facie, appears to
be circumspect - Nonetheless, a person / community cannot
altogether be denied a place to carry out last rites including inter
alia burials - On the contrary, the State has a duty to provide
members of all religious communities with identified places to
carry out last rites within the confines and limits of reason and
rationality. [Para 18]
Case Law Cited
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India [2023] 14 SCR 266 :
(2023) 8 SCC 402; Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala [1986] 3
SCR 518 : (1986) 3 SCC 615 - referred to.
List of Acts
Constitution of India; Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993;
Chhattisgarh Gram Panchayat (Regulating Places for Disposal of
Dead Bodies, Carcasses and other Offensive Matter) Rules, 1999.
List of Keywords
Decent Burial; Article 142 of Constitution; Christian; Articles 14
and 15 of Constitution; Last rites and Ceremonies; Place of burial;
Right to choose place of Ceremony; Graveyard; Mahra Caste.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1235 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 09.01.2025 of the High Court
of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in WPC No. 152 of 2025
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv., Umesh Kumar, Satya Mitra
Advs. for the Respondents:
Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Praffull Bharat, Advocate General,
Avdhesh Singh, A.A.G., K M Nataraj, Vinay Navre, Sr. Advs., Mrs.
Prerna Dhall, Ms. Karishma Rajput, Gopinath Mr, Prashant Singh,
Kaustubh Shukla, Rohit Sharma, Ms. Pushpanjali Singh.
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
965
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Nagarathna, J.
Leave granted.
2.
It is said that death is a great leveller. It is necessary for us to remind
ourselves time and again about this solemn truth. But the instant
case demonstrates that the death of a resident of a village can give
rise to divisiveness thereby calling upon the Apex Court to rule on
his site of burial.
3.
Appellant herein is a bereaved son and an aggrieved litigant. A third
generation Christian, the appellant belongs to the New Apostolic
Church. His family and ancestors have been native residents of
village Chhindwada, Tehsil Darbha, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh for
generations and belong to the Mahra caste or community. A native
resident of the same village Chhindwada, the appellant's father, a
man of faith and a pastor since 1986-87, passed away on January
7th, 2025 after suffering from prolonged illness and old age. In his
living years, the appellant's father led and participated in prayers
organized in the village church and other places as well.
4.
Unfortunately, the appellant's duty as a progeny and wish to accord
a decent burial to his father in his own native village was met with
abrupt hurdles as his fellow villagers objected and threatened the
appellant's family against the burial of the appellant's deceased father
within the village. This objection to burial within the village confines
also extended to restraining the appellant from laying to rest his
father's mortal remains in their privately owned agricultural land. It
is the case of the appellant that to his utter dismay even the local
police forcefully exhorted the appellant's family to take the body out of
the village. There was no help from the local Gram Panchayat also.
Compelled by circumstances and on the advice of fellow relatives,
the family of the appellant proceeded to take his father's body to
the mortuary of District Hospital and Medical College, Jagdalpur.
5.
Aggrieved by these circumstances, the appellant, on 07.01.2025,
submitted representations to the SHO, Police Station Darbha,
District Bastar, Chhattisgarh and the SDO of Tokapal, District Bastar
Chhattisgarh detailing his predicament and seeking police protection
966
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
and from the State authorities for ensuring peaceful burial and last
rites in the Christian burial area of village Chhindwada.
6.
Having received no aid from the State machinery, the appellant
approached the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in W.P.(C)
No.125 of 2024 seeking a direction to the State of Chhattisgarh to
allow the appellant to bury his father at the same site where his
ancestors were buried in the village of Chhindwada and also sought
police protection to that end.
7.
It is pertinent to note that during the pendency of the writ petition, the
'Barahpal Chindwara Gram Panchayat No. 1, 2, 3' issued a certificate
wherein it was certified that there existed no graveyard of Christian
community at any place within the limits of the Gram Panchayat.
8.
Thereafter, the impugned order dated 09.01.2025 came to be passed
by the High Court disposing of the writ petition by refusing to grant
relief as prayed for the appellant.
9.
It was submitted by the appellant before the High Court, as is before
this Court, that village Chhindwada has a graveyard and the Gram
Panchayat has by an oral sanction permitted burial of dead bodies.
Separate graveyards exist for Tribals and other communities. It was
contended that there is a separate area earmarked for the burial/
cremation of persons belonging to the Christian community within
the graveyard of Mahra Caste or community. It was also argued
that appellant's ancestors and relatives, as detailed hereunder,
have throughout the decades been buried in the area demarcated
for Christians. For instance,
i.
Appellant's grandfather died in the year 2007 and
was buried in the graveyard of the village meant for
Christians.
ii.
Two distant relatives of the appellant, namely,
Sadashiv Singh and Bhagirathi, both residents of the
same village were buried in the very same graveyard
in March 2013 after they suffered with their lives at
the hands of Naxalites.
iii.
Appellant's aunt passed away in 2015 and was buried
in the same graveyard of the village Chhindwada.
10. Therefore, the prayer of the appellant was simply that Christian
members of his family i.e. appellant's father be allowed to be buried
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
967
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
in the same manner and at the same place as the Christian members
of his family i.e. appellant's grandfather and aunt had been. It must
be noted that nothing has been brought before this Court to reveal
that there was similar opposition to performing the funeral rites of
appellant's grandfather and aunt in the native village.
11. Per contra, the State relied on the certificate issued by the Gram
Panchayat to contend that no burial ground of the Christian community
exists within its confines. It was alternatively argued that no one
can have any quarrel with funeral rites performed as per original
custom if the appellant were to be permitted to bury his father in
village Karkapal, situated at a distance of 20-25 kms (or more)
from the native village, where a separate burial ground for Christian
community is available.
12. It was this submission that found favour with the High Court as it
observed that "admittedly" there exists no separate burial ground/
graveyard for the members of the Christian community in the
native village whereas it does in the nearby village. The High Court
reasoned that it would not be proper to direct burial of appellant's
father's mortal remains in his own native village to avert 'unrest and
disharmony in the public at large'. Accordingly, the writ petition was
disposed. Therefore, the appellant was left worse off in his own writ
petition as beyond rejecting his main as well as alternative prayers
the High Court also observed that the deceased could be buried in
village Karkapal, which is 20-25 kms far from village Chhindwada.
Hence, the appeal before this Court.
13. Counter-affidavits on behalf of the respondent-State of Chhattisgarh
have been filed which we shall advert to.
14. The first affidavit is dated 19.01.2025 sworn to by the Additional
Superintendent of Police ("ASP"), District Bastar, Chhattisgarh stating
that he is well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the
case borne out of the record and on the basis of the knowledge
gathered from the record he has stated that the appellant is a member
of the Christian community belonging to the New Apostolic Church.
The appellant, his family and ancestors have been residing in the
village Chhindwada since time immemorial and they have agricultural
land in the said village. The appellant and his family belong to the
Mahra Caste and the father of the appellant - the deceased - was
a pastor and had been involved in participating in the prayers of the
village Church and elsewhere too. That the village Chhindwada has
968
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
a total population of 6450 out of which 6000 people belong to tribal
community and rest i.e. 450 people belong to Mahra community. Out
of 450 people, 350 people belong to Hindu Mahra community and
the remaining 100 people belong to Christian community.
14.1 Further, in the village Chhindwada, there is a graveyard and the
Gram Panchayat has orally allocated space for burial/cremation
of the dead bodies. In this village graveyard, separate areas
have been earmarked for burial of tribals and for the burial/
cremation of persons belonging to Hindu religion; that the
appellant's grandfather Lakeshwar Baghel died 28 years ago
and his last rites were carried out as per village rituals as he
was a Hindu; appellant's aunt Shanti Baghel died eight years
ago and her burial was carried out as per Mahra community
rituals in the said village graveyard.
14.2 That the appellant's father died on 07.01.2025 at 7.00 am
due to prolonged illness and the appellant wanted to bury
him in the area specified for Christians in the abovementioned
village graveyard. It is averred that "Hearing about this, some
villagers aggressively objected to this and they threatened
of dire consequences if the instant appellant and his family
buried the instant appellant's father in this land". It is averred
in paragraph '7(f)' of the affidavit that "in the Gram Panchayat,
birth, marriage and death rituals are carried out as per the
tradition. Any person who has forsworn the tradition of the
community or has converted into a Christian is not allowed
to be buried at the village graveyard. It is also averred that
"there is no separate graveyard for Christian community in
Gram Barahpal, Chhindwada". Furthermore, paragraph '7(g)'
avers that "According to the villagers, a Christian person
cannot be buried in their village be it at the village graveyard
or the instant Petitioner's own private land". That, inter alia,
the husband of the incumbent Sarpanch, Mangtu, has objected
to the burial in the instant case and as the villagers turned
violent, the appellant's family made a report to the Police and
30/35 police personnel reached the village. Presently, the dead
body has been kept in the mortuary in the District Hospital
and Medical College, Jagdalpur. The appellant then made an
application seeking protection and help from the respondent-
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
969
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
authorities to ensure the peaceful and honourable burial of
his father in the Christian burial area of the village before the
Chhindwada Police Station and also made similar applications
to the Collector, Bastar; SDM, Tokapal; Inspector General of
Police, Bastar; Superintendent of Police, Bastar and Police
Station Darbha also.
14.3 That, when information was received from Dundul Nag and
District Sarpanch that a pastor of Mendabhata i.e. the appellant's
father has died in his house due to illness, the police arrived
at his house. It is averred in paragraph 8(II) that "as per the
senior citizens, people belonging to tribal community and other
hindu community members, burial should be carried out as per
the Christian rituals in the graveyard of Karkapal, Jagdalpur
and, on the other hand, the Mahara Christian community
members and the family of the deceased wanted to carry out
the burial at Chhindwada as they have been residing there
for generations". That there was a heated exchange between
the members of various communities. Later, it was decided to
file a petition before the High Court.
14.4 That in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 95
read with Section 49(12) of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat
Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (for short "the Act of 1993"), the State
Government has made Chhattisgarh Gram Panchayat
(Regulating Places for Disposal of Dead Bodies, Carcasses and
other Offensive Matter) Rules, 1999 (for short "the 1999 Rules").
That, Rule 3 mandates disposal of the corpse within twenty four
hours whereas Rule 4 casts a duty on the Gram Panchayat to
arrange for disposal of corpse, and Rule 5 provides for place
for disposal of corpse. According to this deponent, "there is
no separate graveyard for Christians at village Chhindwada
which contained the signatures of Sarpanch, Up-Sarpanch and
Panchas"; that, there is no objection if the appellant performs
the funeral rites of his deceased father in the nearby village
Karkapal, which is situated near village Chhindwada, where
there is a separate graveyard for the Christian community.
That, in the past few years, disputes have arisen between
the people belonging to Mahra Christian community and
tribal community owing to their religious beliefs. That, as a
result, every time a member of Mahra Christian community
970
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
dies, the police reach at the place of occurrence of death so
as to avoid any heated exchange between the parties and to
help them to find a solution or a common ground in case any
dispute arises between the parties. It is also averred in para
13 that if the respective communities are unable to find a
solution, "the governmental bodies usually suggest the Mahara
Christian community to use their respective private lands
as their burial ground and in case that fails, then the police
suggests the Christian community to carry burial ceremonies
at the government burial grounds situated at Karkapal which
is approximately 40-45 kms far from Chhindwada". According
to the learned Solicitor General appearing for the State of
Chhattisgarh the distance to Karkapal should be read as
20-25 kms away from Chhindwada.
15. The aforesaid affidavit is followed by another affidavit dated
21.01.2025 wherein the ASP, District Bastar has averred that the
State of Chhattisgarh is essentially a tribal State and has its peculiar
socio-economic position. The tribals customarily do not resort to
cremation at the time of death but they bury their dead in a separate
designated place for burial. This is a "Hindu-tribal-burial site." That,
there are some tribals who are converted Christians and they follow
Christianity as their religion. That in the village in question there
are only 100 converted Christians as against the total population of
6450. As a result, one burial ground is designated for three to four
villages depending upon the number of Christians in each village.
It is averred that the Rules specify and designate a particular
earmarked place for cremation or burial for Muslim/Hindu Tribals/
Other Hindus who bury the dead/Christians. That merely because
"... that in the past in few occasions, the Hindu tribals permitted
their burial grounds to be used for burial of two persons, cannot
be construed as waiver of fundamental rights by the Hindu Tribal
community since the fundamental rights can never be waived." That,
"... a mere deviation in preserving the right of "practice" of religion
in two cases would not change the character of the burial ground
designated for Hindu Tribals whose religion requires burial rather
than cremation." Reference is also made to Articles 21 and 25 of
the Constitution. In light of the above, the deponent has stated that
the State Government would provide an ambulance to carry the
body for being respectfully buried at a designated burial ground for
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
971
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
Christians and/or State Government will ensure adequate security
as deemed necessary.
16. This affidavit is followed by another affidavit filed by the ASP, Bastar
on 22.1.2025. It is averred that there is a designated burial space
for Christians at village Karkapal comprised in Khasra No.9 /94
admeasuring 1.96 acres and that the community has also taken over
adjoining land making the designated land as 2.15 acres which is
sufficient to cater to the need of the Christian burials, considering
the population of Christians in nearby four villages. That there is a
demarcation report prepared in 2013 with respect to the aforesaid
burial ground showing the position of 2.15 acres in the panchnama
drawn on 30.01.2013 in the presence of the persons of the Christian
community. That Christians of all the four villages i.e. Chhindwada,
Munga, Tirathgarh and Darbha are using the said land for burying
the Christians of said four villages. Therefore, the appellant belonging
to Christian community has a designated burial place.
17. In response to these affidavits, the appellant has also filed two
additional affidavits. In the additional affidavit dated 21.01.2025, the
appellant has stated that the de facto situation on the ground level
has been to use the land in Khasra No.725/136 in village Chhindwada
as a graveyard and all communities have used the aforesaid land
as a graveyard which had to be formally recognised by the Gram
Panchayat and the Collector. In this regard, reliance is placed on a
hand-drawn map of the graveyard in Khasra No.725/136 prepared
by the local Patwari, as annexed to the additional affidavit. That,
earlier several Christians from Mahra Caste have been buried in the
village graveyard which has been earmarked partly for the Christians.
Photographs along with the coordinates indicating the latitude and
longitude of the graves and affidavits of the persons who have buried
the dead members of their families in the said graveyard have been
annexed to the additional affidavit.
18. In support of the said material, another additional affidavit dated
22.01.2025 has been filed to counter what has been stated in paragraph
8 of the counter affidavit of the State. It is stated that no Christian in
the neighbouring villages i.e. Darbha, Mamadpal and Karka has ever
buried their deceased in the village Karkapal. It is also stated that in
Chhindwada or the aforesaid surrounding villages, no Christian has
ever taken the body of their dead outside the village for burial.
972
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Submissions:
19. Learned senior counsel, Sri Gonsalves, appearing for the appellant
argued that the High Court has gravely erred by finding reason in
potential "unrest and disharmony" in declining relief to the appellant. It
is the appellant's contention that unruly sentiments have transformed
appellant's deceased father's last rites into a contentious issue, where
none could possibly exist as the family has been burying their dead
at the same location for generations.
19.1 It was emphasized that in the native village of the appellant,
Chhindwada, there are separate graveyards for Tribals and
the Mahra Caste and within the graveyard for Mahra caste
there exists a separate area for burial/cremation of persons
belonging to Hindu religion and the Christian community.
Appellant has also submitted before this Court photographs
and co-ordinates of the graves of his aunt and grandfather,
in the area specified for Christians in the village graveyard.
19.2 Furthermore, it was submitted that the existence of oral
permission by the Gram Panchayat is confirmed by the
practice of burying Christians from the last few decades
including appellant's grandfather and aunt being buried in
the area specified for Christians. Therefore, according to the
appellant, there indubitably is an established practice. In that
light, it was contended that all these decades the local Gram
Panchayat, on the basis of oral permission, had permitted
Christian burials in the village itself and the photographs of the
graves of appellant's family members stand as a testimony to
the said fact. However, the High Court erred in insisting upon
written permission or relying upon the Certificate issued by
the Sarpanch submitted to the Court.
19.3 It was further submitted that this Court may direct the
respondents not to create any hindrance to the burial of
appellant's father adjacent to the burials of his grandfather
and aunt. In alternative, it was submitted that permission may
be granted to the appellant herein to bury his father in his
private agricultural land which would in a way give a quietus
to the controversy.
20. Per contra, learned Solicitor General Sri Tushar Mehta led the
arguments for the respondents along with the learned Advocate
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
973
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
General for the State as well as other counsel for the respondentauthorities by contending that constitutional issues under Article 25
would arise in this case which could be argued at length by both
sides. However, having regard to the facts of the present case and
particularly the fact that the body of the appellant's father is being
preserved at the mortuary of the District Hospital and Medical College
at Jagdalpur since 07.01.2025, as a resolution to the controversy
between the parties, the appellant could bury his father at the burial
ground at Karkapal which is about 20-25 kms from Chhindwada
village and the appellant would be given all support by the State
Government in that regard. In this regard, reliance was placed on
the subsequent two affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents.
20.1 Learned Solicitor General contended that the appellant is
prosecuting a cause which could be given a quietus by the
appellant being permitted to bury his father at Karkapal
graveyard and the matter could be thus concluded.
21. By way of reply, learned senior counsel submitted that if the appellant
desired to conduct the funeral rites of his deceased father at Karkapal
graveyard, which is now being suggested by the respondents, there
was no necessity for him to have made a grievance on the touchstone
of hostile discrimination by filing the writ petition before the High
Court. On the other hand, it is the case of the appellant that owing
to unnecessary objection and threats being raised and orchestrated
for conducting the funeral rites of his father in the village graveyard
he had made representations to the concerned Police and other
authorities for protection which have remained unanswered. In these
circumstances the appellant was constrained to approach the High
Court which has also declined to grant any relief to the appellant.
Hence, appellant is before this Court.
21.1 Learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted with
reference to his additional affidavit that in respect of Khasra
No.725/136, the Patwari of the Chhindwada village has
prepared a sketch indicating that an area of 1.050 ha. of the
total area of 17.607 ha. of the said khasra number is government
land which is "proposed for graveyard". It is averred that this
area has been used for decades as a graveyard and a formal
declaration "is to be made to that effect". The document at
Annexure 'A-1' of 2002-2003 clearly indicates that as there
974
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
has been no settlement survey of the village, therefore, the
map has been prepared by hand. This document is dated
04.05.2024 which is of an undisputed point of time. A list of
Christian deceased persons and the information about those
buried in public graveyard, as per Christian customs, in the
Gram Panchayat of Chhindwada is mentioned indicating that
there are 26 such persons who have been buried. Further,
Annexure A-3 is a hand-drawn sketch indicating that insofar
as the area allocated for the Mahra community is concerned,
there is a portion meant for Christian Mahra graveyard and
another adjacent portion meant for Hindu Mahra graveyard.
Also, there has been no objection as such for Christians to
bury their dead in the said area indicated as Christian Mahra
graveyard in all these decades. The affidavits of the Christian
family members whose relatives have been buried in the said
graveyard along with some photographs of the graves have
also been filed. According to learned senior counsel, these
affidavits indicate that the Mahra community members who
are Christians have buried their dead in the said area as
indicated in the sketch.
21.2 Learned senior counsel stressed on the fact that within the
Mahra community, there are persons following Hindu faith
while others follow the Christian faith and accordingly there is
a demarcation of space in the graveyard area meant for the
entire Mahra community.
21.3 The English translation of the affidavits are filed by the following
persons: (a) Jaldev Kumar, (b) Vijay Bais, (c) Bali Nag, (d)
Piluram Nag, (e) Samel Baghel, (f) Pila Ram, (g) Surendra,
(h) Smt. Poonam, (i) Padmini Nag, (j) Ichhawati Nag, (k) Jwala
Nag, (l) Rajesh Baghel, (m) Bhursu Kashyap, and (n) Rajkumar
Nag, which may be perused.
21.4 All the affidavits indicate the details of the members of their
families who died and were buried in the village graveyard from
the year 1986 onwards till February 2024. The photographs of
some of the graves have also been appended to the affidavits
including that of the graves of the aunt (Shanti Baghel) and
the grandfather (Lakeshwar Baghel) of the appellant.
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
975
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
21.5 Learned senior counsel therefore submitted that unnecessary
objection is being raised for the burial of the appellant's
father in the very same area which has been demarcated for
the burial of the members of Mahra community who follow
the Christian faith. He contended that the appellant may be
permitted to bury his father in the orally demarcated area just
as the other members of the family. According to learned senior
counsel, unnecessarily a controversy has been created with
regard to the burial of the appellant's father. Consequently,
the appellant's father who died on 07.01.2025 has not been
able to have a decent and dignified burial for over two weeks
and his body is lying in the mortuary of the District Hospital.
In the circumstances, he submitted that the objections raised
by the respondents may be overruled and the appellant may
be granted relief so that the dignity of his deceased father is
not jeopardised. Alternatively, it was submitted that appellant
may be permitted to bury his father in his private agricultural
land in Chhindwada village.
Analysis:
22. The pleadings and affidavits filed by the respective parties have
been considered. On a perusal of the affidavit of the respondentState dated 19.01.2025, it is inferred that there is no separate
graveyard sanctioned exclusively for the Christians in Gram
Barahpal, Chhindwada; that the Mahra community in Barahpal village,
Chhindwada comprises of both Hindus, to a large extent and the
Christians are lesser in number. That in the said Gram Panchayat,
birth, marriage and death rituals are carried out as per the religious
traditions to which the residents belong.
22.1 It is also noted that earlier, at least 20 persons belonging to
the Christian faith have been buried in the graveyard and the
Gram Panchayat of Barahpal, Chhindwada had always orally
permitted the members of the Christian community belonging
to the Mahra community to be buried in the demarcated space
in the village graveyard and the burials have taken place since
mid-1980s and as late as in February 2024.
22.2 But there is now hostility raised against the burial of the
appellant's father in the very same area. When earlier the
976
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Gram Panchayat, Barahpal, Chhindwada had permitted burial
of the dead who were followers of the Christian faith, there
is no reason to disallow in the case of the appellant's father.
The detailed affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents when
juxtaposed with the affidavits filed by the appellant would
indicate the following:
i.
That in the area demarcated as a graveyard for the Mahra
community, there is an internal demarcation as (i) Hindu
Mahra graveyard; and, (ii) Christian Mahra graveyard. The
persons belonging to respective faiths are buried within
the area demarcated for the Mahra community all these
decades without there being any objection from any quarter.
ii.
The demarcation may not be by a formal order passed by
the Panchayat but the allocation of the respective areas
within the area reserved for the Mahra community in the
graveyard is indicative of the fact that the Panchayat of
the Barahpal village Chhindwada has all along recognised
and permitted the burial of the dead, as per their faith,
in the demarcated areas of the graveyard meant for the
entire Mahra community.
iii. There has never been any objection to the burial of
several other persons belonging to the Mahra Community
following Christian faith in the said graveyard from any
of the residents of the village inasmuch as the additional
affidavit of the appellant indicates that all along persons
belonging to the Mahra community following the Christian
faith have buried their dead in the area demarcated for
the said community.
iv. The second additional affidavit of the appellant also
indicates that not one Christian in Chhindwada village has
used the graveyard in village Karkapal.
22.3 In view of the aforesaid circumstances and Rule 5 of the 1999
Rules, it is observed that it is the duty of the Gram Panchayat
to ensure that a dead person of the village is buried as early
as possible and within a period of 24 hours irrespective of
whatever faith he follows. But here is a case, where on the socalled objection of certain residents of the village the appellant
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
977
Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others
is contending that he is being denied burial of his father in
the village graveyard in the area demarcated for the Mahra
community following the Christian faith, which is adjacent to
the area orally demarcated for the Mahra community following
the Hindu faith. The relevant Rules are reproduced as under:
"3. Disposal of corpse within 24 hours.-
(1) When a person has died in any place within the
Gram Panchayat area, the occupier or owner
of such place shall, to the best of his ability,
arrange through the deceased person's relatives
or otherwise for the corpse to be buried, burnt
or otherwise disposed of in accordance with the
custom of the deceased person's religion within
twenty four hours of death; or if he is unable to
make such arrangement, shall within twenty four
hours of death, report the fact to the Sarpanch
or to the Secretary of the Gram Panchayat or
to such person as the Gram Panchayat may
appoint in this behalf.
(2) Every person who becomes aware that a corpse
is lying in any place uncared for, shall forth
with report that fact to the Sarpanch or to such
person as the Gram Panchayat may appoint in
this behalf and also to the occupier or owner
of that place.
(3) Nothing in this rule shall apply to a case where
the body of the deceased is required for the
purpose of a judicial or police, enquiry
4. Gram Panchayat to arrange for disposal of
corpse.-
(1) On receipt of a report under sub-rule (2) of rule
3, the Gram Panchayat shall arrange for the
disposal of the corpse.
(2) The expense's incurred for such disposal shall
be recovered from the heirs of the deceased
if any, as arrears of tax levied under the Act.
978
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
(3) If there be no such heirs the expenses shall be
borne by the Gram Panchayat.
5. Place for disposal of corpses.-
No place other than a place approved by the Gram
Panchayat by an order in writing duly published in the
village, which shall be known as burning ghat or burial
ground or a place determined by the Government
or in the Government records shall be used for the
disposal of a corpse by burning, burying or otherwise."
22.4 Even according to Annexure P-10 dated 09.01.2025 which is
issued by the Sarpanch and Deputy Sarpanch of "Barahpal
Chhindwada Gram Panchayat No.1, 2 and 3, no graveyard
of Christian community at any place within the limits of Gram
Panchayat Chhindwada Nos.1, 2 and 3 is established yet. For
immediate reference, the said certificate is extracted as under:
"OFFICE
Barahpal Chindwara Gram Panchayat No. 1, 2, 3
It is certified that till date there is no graveyard of
Christian community at any place within the limits of
Gram Panchayat Chindwara No. 1, Gram Panchayat
Chindwada No. 2, Gram Panchayat Chindwada No.
3 under the Barahpal Chindwara.
That Tehsil of Barahpal Chindwara comes under
Darbha, P.S.