New Delhi [India], January 21 (HBTV): The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its displeasure over the dismissal of a Christian man's plea seeking permission to bury his deceased father's body in his family's native village by the Chhattisgarh High Court.

A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma lamented that the body of the deceased person had been lying in a mortuary for the last 12 days, with no resolution provided by either the state authorities or the high court.

The Court stated that it was pained by the fact that a person had to approach the Supreme Court for the burial of his father.

Further, the Court asked the state respondents about the position of the authorities regarding such burials in the village.

'What was the position all these decades? Why is this objection being raised only now?' the top court judge asked.

During the hearing, the Court inquired whether there had been any resolution to the unfortunate situation regarding the deceased's body lying in the mortuary since January 7.

The Supreme Court was hearing Chhattisgarh's response to a plea filed by Christian man Ramesh Baghel, who had challenged the Chhattisgarh High Court's decision, which had denied him permission to bury his deceased father according to his family's religious rituals in his resident village.

The High Court had stated that granting Baghel permission to bury his father in the village's common burial area would cause a law and order problem, as villagers had raised objections. The Court noted that a separate burial area for Christians was available in a nearby village, situated 20-25 kilometers away from the petitioner's village.

When the case came up at the Supreme Court, Solicitor General of India (SG) Tushar Mehta, representing Chhattisgarh, submitted that the burial ground in question is designated for the Hindu tribal community and not for Christians.

On being asked by the Court why the petitioner's father could not be buried on their private land, as originally sought, SG Mehta explained that this is prohibited under the law.

'All over the country, there are designated cremation places and burial places... once you bury someone, the character of the land changes; it becomes sacred and has health issues,' SG Mehta said.

Justice Nagarathna was not pleased with SG Mehta's submission. 'The third day after cremation, nothing remains. Burial of persons is permitted on their land,' the judge stated.

SG Mehta argued that the petitioner's plea was not just about protecting the interests of one individual. 'It's the beginning of something more,' Mehta said.

Further, the state submitted that there are designated burial areas about 20 km away from the village, where all Christians from the petitioner's village carry out their burial activities.

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, representing the petitioner, countered the state's submission by asserting that the state was attempting to break with the tradition of secularism that had been followed in the village for a long time.

He presented photographs of graves of other deceased members of the petitioner's family, who had been buried in the common burial area in the village. The senior counsel specifically pointed out that crosses (depicting the Christian symbol) were visible on those graves.

At this point, a heated exchange took place between SG Mehta and Senior Advocate Gonsalves.

The court listed the matter for further hearing on Wednesday, at SG Mehta's request, after he indicated that he would file a better counter-reply to the petitioner's plea.

(ANI)