New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Monday dismissed a plea challenging an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court concerning the installation of hoardings in certain villages allegedly prohibiting the entry of pastors and converted Christians.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta refused to entertain the petition, observing that the petitioner had not availed the appropriate statutory remedy before approaching the apex court.
The matter relates to an October 2025 order of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which had disposed of two separate pleas seeking the removal of hoardings put up in some villages in Kanker district. The petitioners had alleged that the hoardings barred the entry of Christian pastors and “converted Christians” and amounted to segregation of the Christian community.
While disposing of the pleas, the high court had referred to a previous Supreme Court verdict and observed that installing hoardings aimed at preventing forcible religious conversion through allurement or fraudulent means could not, by itself, be termed unconstitutional. The court directed the petitioners to pursue remedies under the statutory framework before the competent authority.
During Monday’s hearing, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the petitioner, referred to a separate pending matter before the apex court concerning alleged attacks on pastors. He argued that the high court’s directions effectively asked the petitioners to approach the gram sabha.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta countered that the plea before the high court had a limited scope, but the petitioner had introduced several new facts and documents in the appeal before the Supreme Court.
The bench asked Gonsalves to examine the specific directions issued by the high court, pointing out that a statutory mechanism was available. The judges observed that the petitioner should have first approached the competent authority, which could have examined the grievance in accordance with the law.
After hearing submissions from both sides, the bench dismissed the petition.
Before the high court, the petitioners had contended that authorities circulated a format of a resolution in Kanker district titled “Hamari Parampara Hamari Virasat” (Our Tradition, Our Heritage), allegedly instructing gram panchayats to adopt resolutions prohibiting the entry of pastors and converted Christians.
They claimed that at least eight villages in the district had erected such hoardings. However, the state’s counsel argued that the pleas were based on apprehensions that the hoardings were installed at the behest of government authorities.
The high court had ultimately held that the petitioners must exhaust the statutory remedy available under the law before invoking the writ jurisdiction of the court — a view that the Supreme Court has now declined to interfere with.
