No More Exhumations: Supreme Court Stays Forced Removal of Tribal Christians’ Bodies in Chhattisgarh Villages

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and N V Anjaria directed that the status quo be maintained. “In the meantime, it is provided that no further exhumation of buried bodies shall be permitted,” the Court ordered.

The writ petition, argued by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, highlights what it describes as a systematic practice of preventing tribal Christians from burying their dead within their native villages, a right allegedly enjoyed by all other communities. The petition represents a sample of 143 affected families, primarily from Bastar, Kanker and Dantewada districts, who claim they have lived in these villages for generations but are now being denied burial rights on religious grounds.

According to the plea, local administrations and police authorities have exhumed bodies already buried and forcibly shifted them to so-called “designated burial sites” located as far as 50 to 76 kilometres away. Gonsalves told the Court that in several cases bodies were exhumed without the knowledge or consent of family members. Citing specific instances, he said one petitioner’s mother was reburied without informing the son, while another petitioner’s husband’s body was exhumed and moved to an undisclosed location. Photographs and videos documenting these exhumations were placed on record.

Justice Vikram Nath asked who the respondents were in the case. Gonsalves responded that the State of Chhattisgarh alone had been impleaded, asserting that the State machinery was actively facilitating or supporting these removals. He pressed for immediate interim protection to prevent further desecration of graves.

Filed through Advocate-on-Record (AoR) Satya Mitra, the petition contends that the practice violates Articles 14, 15, 21 and 25 of the Constitution, as well as the rights of Scheduled Tribes. It alleges that communal pressure groups, acting with police presence or assistance, have dug up graves and compelled reburial at distant locations, despite there being no statutory notification providing for religion- or caste-based “designated” burial grounds.

The plea also relies on the Supreme Court’s 2025 split verdict in Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh, alleging that the judgment is being selectively misused by the police to justify interference even in villages where no local objection exists. The petitioners claim that in Ramesh Baghel, incorrect submissions were made to the Court regarding the distance to the alternative burial site, and that no formal designation of burial grounds exists under law.

Additionally, the petition alleges that pastors who conducted burials at the request of grieving families were arrested, detained, and in some cases sent to jail. The petition seeks wide-ranging reliefs, including a declaration that all persons, irrespective of religion, caste or SC/ST/OBC status, are entitled to bury their dead in the villages where they reside, directions to gram panchayats to demarcate common burial areas for all communities, and orders restraining State interference with customary burial practices.

The interim order comes against the backdrop of earlier decisions of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which had declined similar relief on the ground that allowing burial in village graveyards could disturb communal harmony. With the Supreme Court’s intervention, the issue of burial rights of tribal Christians in the State is now squarely before the apex court for adjudication.