The “Rights” of a Burial in Chhindwada 

When Ramesh Baghel’s father died earlier this month he had little inkling that the last rites of his father would reach the highest court of the land. The late Subhash Baghel was a Christian pastor from Chhindwada village in Bastar district. When he died, his son wanted to bury him in his native village. That did not happen and on Monday, the Supreme Court ordered that he be buried in a community graveyard some 25kms away. The two-judge Supreme Court bench gave a split verdict with one judge favouring burial at Chhindwada while the other said the last rites should be performed at the burial ground earmarked for the community in a different village.

As in many such cases, there is a gap between the judicial verdict and the prevailing social realities that are considerably more complicated than what a bare reading of facts permits.

The elder Baghel was a member of the New Apostolic Church, one of the many Christian denominations that have been very active in the Bastar region of Chhattisgarh. When he died on 7^th January, his son wanted to bury him in his native village. There was, however, one problem: the village had no formally marked burial ground for the Christian community. The gram panchayat said as much in an order on 9^th January. This was vigorously contested and it was claimed—with factual basis—that many Christians had been buried in Chhindwada over the years on the basis of an “oral” understanding to the effect that a separate burial ground was marked for them.

In the event, Justice B V Nagarathna ordered the burial to be conducted at Baghel’s private agricultural land in Chhindwada. She also ordered the Chhattisgarh government to “demarcate exclusive sites as grave yards for burial of Christians throughout the State in accordance with law.”

The other judge, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, had a different perspective on the matter. In his separate verdict, he said that, “There can be no qualm about the fact that procedures pertaining to last rites; and ceremonies involved, form a part of the rights protected under Part III of the Constitution of India. However, to claim that such rights would encompass the unqualified right to choose the “place” of such ceremony (including burial) would prima facie appear to stretch constitutional limits beyond what is envisaged.”

Justice Sharma also analysed the issue of public order involved in the case. This was primarily the reason why the local police intervened to order the burial at a community graveyard at village Karkapal some 20-25 kms away from Chhindwada.

CONVERSIONS AND IDENTITY

In recent years the issue of burials for Christians—who are mostly converts from adivasi community in the region—has led to controversy and even violence in Bastar. The issue of conversions in the state is not unique to Bastar as conversions have been aggressively undertaken for decades in the Ambikapur region in the Northern part of the state. But there is one crucial difference: there is no violence associated with burials or any other Christian traditions in Ambikapur while in Bastar violence flares up periodically or the issue continues to bubble under the surface as in villages like Chhindwada. What explains this difference?

In December 2022 and January 2023 violence erupted in villages of Narayanpur and Kondagaon districts that adjoin each other in the Bastar region. Hundreds of Christian converts from villages in remote parts of these districts sought refuge in district headquarters after violence against them. At that time, the issue was reported from the lens of “creeping Hindutva” destroying the “secular” fabric of the region. The reality was different.

In most of these villages—many of them abutting the road linking Kondagaon and Narayanpur—the number of Christian converts had gone up steadily in recent years. Unlike Ambikapur where the Christian denomination undertaking conversions was different, the missionaries in Bastar insisted that adivasi converts take steps to distinguish themselves from their fellow villagers. Separate religious places, distinct burial customs and a clear demarcation of social life became common. This led to friction once the number of converts increased even as efforts to convert adivasis—who are largely animist in beliefs—continued unabated. This friction was blamed on elections in the state (which were held in late 2023) or Hindutva but never on the aggression displayed by missionaries. It is interesting to note that the instant case from Chhindwada took place when there was no on-going political activity in the region or in the state.

When Open visited the region in 2023, the dominant theme in villages like Palna, Modenga, Boravad and others in the vicinity of Benoor (on the Kondagaon-Narayanpur road) was that adivasi identity was under threat from conversions. Interestingly those Christians who had suffered violence said that their co-villagers were responsible for the problem and not “outsiders”, an euphemism for Hindu activists who have entered the region as a reaction to conversions.

These are issues that cannot be resolved by mere judicial fiat. There is no doubt that violence against any religious community is unacceptable but conversions that threaten the identity of adivasis who have lived undisturbed in the area for thousands of years are a problem at the root of the churn in the state.

BastarChhindwadaconversionHindus-ChristiansRamesh BaghelSubhash BagheltribalsWeb Exclusive