Delhi HC dismisses plea to remove graves of Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhatt from Tihar

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking the removal of the graves of Parliament attack convict Mohammad Afzal Guru and JKLF founder Mohammad Maqbool Bhatt from Tihar Jail premises. Both were awarded the death penalty and executed in the jail over a decade ago.

Why was the plea filed?

The petitioners argued that maintaining graves of convicted terrorists within a government facility was inappropriate and sought judicial intervention for their relocation.

The petitioners claimed that the Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhatt graves had turned Tihar into a “site of radical pilgrimage where extremist elements gather to venerate convicted terrorists,” thereby undermining public order and secular principles.

What did the Delhi High Court say?

A Division Bench emphasised that such decisions were sensitive matters taken by the government at the time of execution and could not be reopened after more than twelve years.

“But removing a grave which might have been in existence with the last 12 years… the govt decided it keeping in view the fallout regarding permitting giving the body to the family or burial outside the Tihar jail? These are very sensitive issues… there are so many factors… govt (took a decision) keeping in view all the aspects… took a call. Can we now challenge that decision after 12 years? Removal after 12 years,” Bar and Bench quoted the Delhi High Court.

The Delhi HC noted that only the competent authority could take decisions on burial within prison premises and that judicial interference was unwarranted in the absence of a law prohibiting graves in prisons.

What about pilgrimage or glorification?

While the Delhi High Court dismissed the plea, it acknowledged concerns about potential glorification of the site. “We agree that there should be no pilgrimage or glorification but there has to be data on this. We can direct the jail authorities to stop that but removing the grave after 12 years,” the Bench added.

The petitioner’s counsel requested permission to withdraw the PIL and file a fresh one with empirical data supporting claims of glorification, which the Court allowed.

Did the Delhi High consider legal provisions?

The Court questioned whether any law specifically prohibited graves in prison and examined the Delhi Prisons Rules and the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. It concluded that no such prohibition exists and that decisions regarding burial were for the authorities to make.

“There is no provision which says that prisoner’s dead body has to be cremated in the jail… This lies in their (authorities) realm,” the Bench stated.

What was the final outcome?

The PIL, filed through advocates Sneh Vardhan and Pratibha Sinha, was dismissed as withdrawn, allowing the petitioners to refile with supporting data if they choose.