Madras HC Cemetery Case: The Madras High Court intervened in a church cemetery dispute holding that the Bishop is not entitled to ‘plough cemetery like a field’. (This image is generated using AI)
Madras High Court Church Dispute News: The Madras High Court recently intervened in a church cemetery dispute, holding that the matter was not merely about property rights, but was touching on the deeply sensitive issue of the “dignity of the dead” and the sanctity of a Christian cemetery maintained by a Parish church.
Justice L Victoria Gowri was hearing the plea, filed by a parish member, who alleged that the church officials, in January, demolished the existing graves and tombs in a century-old cemetery, using three JCBs, without the consent of the families of the deceased or the broader church membership.
The high court noted that the tomb structures of existing graves were demolished without consultation or consent of the concerned families and said that it prima facie attracts the definition of “offering indignity to any human corpse” and “trespass in any place of sepulture”.
Responding to the the church office-bearers’s argument that under “canon law and ecclesiastical hierarchy”, the Bishop and Parish priest exercise ownership and control over church properties, including cemeteries, and can “permit demolition of tombs” in the cemetery, the court said that any holder of property, particularly religious property dedicated to public or community use, is a “trustee” subject to constitutional limitations, human rights norms and statutory restrictions.
“Describing the Bishop as ‘title holder’ does not mean that he has an absolute right to ‘plough the cemetery like a field’,” the court said.
The court observed that the church cemetery is a “sacred trust” held for the benefit of the faithful and for posterity, indicating that it is not a disposable asset in the hands of “administrators”.
Noting that the trial court did not examine the matter on merits due to the absence of a requisite supporting affidavit, Justice Gowri directed the matter to be remanded to the trial court, observing that the defect was curable and the petitioners should be given an opportunity to file the affidavit before passing any order on merits.
The court noted that the cemetery concerned is century old where families of church members are buried in the common cemetery. The petitioner submitted that the family used to pay Rs 20,000 for each burial as a fee for the grave space.
It was further pointed out that the said graveyard has been used and maintained as a “sacred burial site” for generations of the parishioners.
Referring to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the court pointed out that it includes the “right to dignity in death” and the “right to decent burial”.
The order added, “Human dignity attaches not only to the living but also to the dead, and that proper treatment of human remains and burial is an integral aspect of that dignity”.
The high court also referred to several international laws and acknowledged that these decisions have persuasive value and reinforce the universal principle that “burial grounds and cemeteries are loci of human dignity, privacy, family memory and cultural identity, and that their arbitrary demolition or desecration is incompatible with contemporary human rights standards”.