New Delhi, Jan 27 (Reporter) The Supreme Court on Monday delivered a split verdict regarding a plea by a Christian man from Chhattisgarh seeking permission to bury his father, a pastor, in the burial ground of their native village, Chindwara, or on their private agricultural land. The case highlighted the broader issue of whether a converted Christian tribal could claim burial rights in a graveyard traditionally designated for another faith. A two-judge bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma differed in their opinions. While Justice Nagarathna allowed the burial on the appellant's private agricultural land, Justice Sharma upheld the High Court’s decision that the burial must occur at a Christian graveyard 20–25 kilometres away in Karkapal village. Despite their disagreement, the bench refrained from referring the matter to a larger bench due to the situation's urgency, as the body had been in a mortuary since January 7. Justice Nagarathna emphasized that denying burial in the village graveyard violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination based on religion. She criticized the gram panchayat and the state's affidavit opposing the burial, stating that it undermined secularism and fraternity. She noted that the village panchayat had failed in its duty to resolve the issue and condemned the discriminatory treatment faced by the appellant's family. Directing immediate action, she allowed the burial on the appellant’s private land and ordered the state to demarcate burial grounds for Christians across the state within two months. Justice Sharma held that burial rights are not absolute and must adhere to designated areas as per public order and state regulations. He emphasized that the appellant’s father could be buried at the designated Christian graveyard in Karkapal, and the state should provide logistical and police support for the burial. He stated that extending burial rights indiscriminately to graveyards earmarked for other faiths could disrupt public order. In a unanimous order issued under Article 142 of the Constitution, the bench decided that The burial would take place in the designated Christian graveyard at Karkapal. The state would provide logistical support and ensure police protection to facilitate a dignified burial. The case pertains to the appellant’s father, a member of the Mahra tribal community, who converted to Christianity and passed away on January 7. The family sought to bury him in the village graveyard where their ancestors were buried. However, villagers objected, arguing that the graveyard was meant only for Hindu tribals. The Chhattisgarh High Court directed the burial to take place at the Christian graveyard in Karkapal, prompting the appellant to approach the Supreme Court. The family argued that the refusal to allow burial in the village graveyard violated constitutional rights, while the state contended that designated burial grounds should be used to maintain public order. The case underscores challenges faced by marginalized communities, particularly converted Christians, in exercising their fundamental rights. Justice Nagarathna invoked precedents emphasizing secularism and tolerance, while Justice Sharma stressed balancing individual rights with public order. This split verdict highlights the complexities of balancing constitutional guarantees with societal practices, reaffirming the judiciary's role in addressing sensitive issues with care and urgency...////...