Today, the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict regarding the right of a deceased Christian convert from the Scheduled Tribe (ST) community to be buried in his ancestral village burial ground.

A Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma today found themselves unable to agree at what the ideal solution should be.

The judges, however, chose to issue common directions to resolve the matter rather than referring it to a larger bench.

The case arose over a dispute regarding whether the deceased, who had converted to Christianity, could be buried in the village burial ground where his Hindu ancestors were laid to rest.

The Chhattisgarh government insisted that the man be buried in a separate Christian burial ground, situated 20 kilometers from the village, citing concerns about potential law and order issues.

The deceased’s son, however, argued that his father should have the right to be buried alongside his ancestors and should not face discrimination due to his conversion.

While Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma were unable to reach a consensus on the ideal solution, they decided against referring the case to a larger bench, as the deceased had already been lying in the morgue since January 7.

Instead, they issued the following directions under Article 142: the burial would take place at the burial ground in Karakwal, 20 kilometers away from the deceased’s village, and logistical support for the burial process would be provided.

Justice Nagarathna, in her opinion, proposed that the deceased be buried on his family’s private agricultural land, despite the State's concern that regulations typically do not allow such a burial. She also recommended that the State provide security for this burial and emphasized that within two months, the State should allocate burial grounds for Christians in every state.

She criticized the refusal to allow the burial in the village graveyard, calling it discriminatory and unconstitutional. Justice Nagarathna argued that the affidavit by the Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP), which claimed that a converted Christian could not be buried in the village, was an unfortunate violation of Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution, which guarantee equality before the law and prohibit religious discrimination. She also condemned the village panchayat’s hostile stance and the State's failure to take action against such attitudes, labeling it a betrayal of the principle of secularism.

Justice Sharma, however, disagreed with these aspects. He argued that the right to burial in a particular place should not be considered an absolute right, especially when public order is at stake. He stated that burial grounds are typically designated for specific faiths, and the Christian burial ground 20 kilometers away was an adequate alternative. He further asserted that the freedom of religion should not extend to claiming burial rights in places designated for another faith.

Justice Sharma upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court’s decision, which had denied the burial in the village graveyard, but ordered that the State provide the necessary support for transporting the body to the designated Christian burial ground. He emphasized that no law and order issues should arise during this process.

The case originated when Ramesh Bhaghel sought permission to bury his Christian father in the graveyard of their native village, Chhindawada, where areas were informally designated for different communities. However, some villagers opposed the burial, even threatening severe consequences, and insisted that a Christian person could not be buried in the village, either in the public graveyard or on private property.

The Chhattisgarh High Court had dismissed Bhaghel’s plea, noting that a designated Christian burial ground existed 20–25 kilometers away. The High Court had cited concerns that burying the deceased in a Hindu burial ground could lead to unrest and disharmony. Bhaghel appealed to the Supreme Court, with Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves representing him and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Chhattisgarh government.