Dispute Over Burial Rights Between Two Muslim Communities Not Maintainable As PIL: Uttarakhand High Court

The Uttarakhand High Court has held that a claim relating to burial rights asserted by members of one Muslim community against another community in respect of a Kabristan would not fall within the scope of a Public Interest Litigation. The Court observed that such rights may be established in appropriate civil proceedings or through such other mode as may be advised. On this basis, the Court disposed of the PIL.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay was dealing with a PIL seeking directions to ensure that no interference is caused in the burial of dead bodies and performance of post death rituals of members belonging to the Barelvi community in a Kabristan situated at village Bhaniyawala, Dehradun.  

The petition was filed in a representative capacity, asserting burial rights in favour of members of the Barelvi community. It was alleged that the burial ground was being used by members of another Muslim community, namely the Deobandi community, and that respondents were not permitting members of the Barelvi community to use the burial ground.

It was further stated that the strength of the Barelvi community in the village was much higher as compared to the strength of the Deobandi community. On this basis, directions as well as adequate protections were sought to ensure peaceful burial of dead bodies and performance of post death rituals in the Kabristan without interference.

“The right of burial being claimed by members of a particular community of Muslim as against the other community, in our considered opinion, would not be a matter falling under Public Interest Litigation”, the Court noted.

In this backdrop, the Court held that such a dispute would not be a matter falling under Public Interest Litigation. The Court observed that it would be open to the petitioner and members of the said community to establish the claimed right in appropriate civil proceedings or through such other mode as may be advised.  

Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of.

Pending applications, if any, were also disposed of.  

Case Name: Mohd. Shahzad v State of Uttarakhand

Case No.: Writ Petition (PIL) No. 64 of 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order