Chhattisgarh High Court Bans Native Village from Allowing Christian Man to Bury Father

Chhattisgarh High Court Bans Native Village from Allowing Christian Man to Bury Father

Chhattisgarh High Court has recently refused to allow a Christian man to bury his father in his native village due to opposition by the locality's people, who argued that it would violate their customary practices as well as social harmony if a man from a different community is allowed to be buried in their locality.Case History A petitioner residing in one of the villages of Chhattisgarh had filed a complaint against the said court to interfere with the burial of the deceased father by the petitioner. The petitioner asserts that death burial is part of the Christian religion and the family owns the land in question, which makes it perfectly suitable for burial. However, the local community opposed the burial by stating that the village traditionally follows a cremation-based system for disposing of the deceased. They argued that allowing a burial would contravene long-standing traditions and could lead to communal tension. Observations of the High Court The Chhattisgarh High Court, while appreciating the religious beliefs of the petitioner, underlined the need to maintain social harmony in the community. The court observed that: It would be violative of customary practices prevailing in the village. Social Harmony: Such permission granted could cause a disturbance among the villagers, which could lead to law-and-order problems. It further stated that permission granted would lead to the burial of the deceased in the Christian burial ground provided for, and therefore it would honor his religious belief and the customary practices prevailing in the village. Legal Grounds of the Decision The High Court applied the doctrine of weighing the individual rights with the interest of the society. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution grants the right to freedom of religion, which is qualified by public order, morality, and health. On this issue, the court ruled that the public order concerns outweighed the individual religious rights of the petitioner. Case of the Petitioner The petitioner had argued that: It was held on private property belonging to the family. It was an act which was perfectly lawful. They had been denied the right to bury which fell directly under Article 25 of the Constitution in order to exercise the fundamental right of professing religion. The stand of the villagers was not justifiable as it was a way to impose community practice on the private religious act of an individual. Conclusion The Chhattisgarh High Court judgment is a delicate balance between individual rights and societal norms. While the court acknowledged the religious sentiments of the petitioner, it preferred to maintain social harmony and respect the traditions of the village. The case is a challenge for courts in resolving disputes involving religious freedoms and customary practices, which requires a harmonious coexistence of diverse beliefs in Indian society.

Find Lawyers In Your City

Connect with Best Lawyers at your location