Shaunak Choudhury | SVKM’s NMIMS Kirit P. Mehta School of Law | 27th May 2020
Pradeep Gandhy v. State of Maharashtra
Facts
The Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai passed an order on 30th March 2020, in exercise of the Regulation 10 of the 14th March 2020 notification about the Maharashtra COVID-19 Regulations 2020. The order directed that no person who dies of COVID-19 shall be buried in a cemetery and instead will be cremated. The order allowed burial only outside the bounds of Mumbai City. On 30th March 2020 itself the circular was amended to allow burial in larger cemeteries. The Respondents claimed that the circular was in pursuance of limiting the spread of COVID-19 through dead bodies. On 9th April 2020, the circular was further amended to allow burial of COVID-19 patients in a specific number of cemeteries and kabrasthans. The Petitioner was a resident in an area which had 3 of the 20 kabrasthans opened for COVID-19 deaths. The Petitioner claimed that the April amendment would endanger the lives of the residents and that the Respondents should not allow the burial in those 3 kabrasthans that were in close proximity to the Petitioner.
Two other petitions were entertained in this case, both wanting the original circular and the amendment to be quashed, in order to allow burial of COVID-19 patients in all kabrasthans and cemeteries. These Petitioners claimed that there was no evidence to suggest that COVID-19 can spread from burial sites.
Issues
- Whether the circular dated 10th March 2020 is valid.
Judgement
The Court found that as per the guidelines given by the World Health Organization and the Government of India, there is no evidence to suggest that either authority claims that the burial of COVID-19 patients causes the spread of the virus. The guidelines of the WHO titled “Infection Prevention and Control for the safety management of a dead body in the context of COVID-19” dated 24th March 2020 and the guidelines of the Government of India dated 15th March 2020 were referred to in order to determine this question of fact. The burial of deceased COVID-19 patients is possible through the correct procedure as prescribed by the guidelines of the Government and thus to prohibit burial on those grounds seemed unnecessary and the step was seen as a misinformed one. The cases that the Petitioner put forth to prove the position in law were not relevant or were in fact detrimental to his case. The Court rejected the Petitioner’s plea.
As for the other petitions, since the Corporation had already allowed burials in specific sites, the Court did not find it necessary to act on any other front. It left the matter of the number of sites to be determined by the Corporation itself.
Leave a Reply