'Not Unconstitutional': Chhattisgarh HC Dismisses Petitions Against Hoardings Barring Pastors' Entry in Villages
New Delhi: The Chhattisgarh high court dismissed two petitions against hoardings barring the entry of pastors and “converted christians” in eight villages across the state, saying that they were meant to prevent forced conversions and thus could not be deemed unconstitutional.
The court’s judgement, dated October 28, 2025 came in response to petitions filed by one Digbal Tandi of Kanker district and Narendra Bhavani of Bastar district, the Hindu reported.
The petitioners had alleged that hoardings promoted segregation of the Christian community and its leaders from others in the village along religious lines.
However, a bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru noted that the hoardings appeared to be a precautionary measure to protect the interests of the indigenous tribal community and local cultural heritage, the report said.
‘Hoardings have created a sense of fear’
According to the petitioners, the Panchayat Department had instructed the zilla panchayat, janpad panchayat and the gram panchayat to pass a resolution saying "Hamari Parampara Hamari Virasat (our tradition, our heritage)”.
The petitioners said that the hoarding put up in the Ghotiya gram panchayat of Kanker’s Bhanupratappur tehsil invoked the Panchayat (Extension to Schedule Area) Act, 1996 (PESA Act) saying that the village came under the 5th Schedule Area, thus allowing the gram sabha to protect the identity and culture of the village.
Similar hoardings were also erected in Kudal, Parvi, Junwani, Ghota, Havechur, Musurputta and Sulangi villages, the petitioners said.
The petitioners claimed that the hoardings had created a sense of fear among people from the Christian community.
They said that the gram sabhas did not have the authority to pass resolutions that violated the Constitution and the law, arguing that the hoardings violated Article 25 of the Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion.
‘Gram sabha empowered to protect local heritage’
Additional Advocate General Y.S. Thakur argued that the PESA rules allowed gram sabhas to protect local culture and heritage.
Thakur argued that members of the Scheduled Tribe communities residing in the villages were being “allured” and forcibly converted to Christianity, in violation of PESA rules. The hoardings were only meant to bar those pastors who were visiting the villages to illegally convert its residents, Thakur added.
Thakur further argued that if someone was unsatisfied with the gram sabha's decision, then they could have appealed before the sub-divisional officer (Revenue).
The senior advocate said that the petitioners had not exhausted statutory remedies before moving the high court, thus their petition was not maintainable.
The high court, citing Supreme Court judgements, ruled that "the installation of the hoardings for preventing forcible conversion by way of allurement or fraudulent means cannot be termed as unconstitutional".
The court added that the petitioners may seek police protection if they feared being barred from entering their villages.
This article went live on November third, two thousand twenty five, at seven minutes past five in the evening.The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
