Protection of cultural identity under PESA Act does not violate religious freedom, and reasonable restrictions may be imposed on movement and religious activities to maintain social order.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. Kishore Narayan, Dr. Arpit Lall and Mr. Ayush Lall, learned counsel for the respective petitioners, Mr. Y.S. Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State as well as Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Mr. Anupam Dubey, Mr. B. Gopa Kumar (through Video Conferencing), Mr. Himanshu Pandey, Mr. Palash Tiwari, Mr. Rohit Sharma, Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Mr. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Vaibhav P. Shukla, Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Mr. Jay Singh, Advocates for the respective respondents.

2. The petitioner, in WPPIL No. 83/2025, has prayed for the following relief(s):

“(i) Call for the relevant records of the case.

(ii) Declare that the hoardings erected in the village set out in para 8.2 of this petition are unconstitutional, illegal and in violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25 and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India.

(iii) Directing the respondents to remove the illegal hoardings above mentioned.

(iv) Directing the respondent authorities particularly the Collector and Superintendent of Police, District Kanker to visit the villages where the above mentioned hoardings have been erected and convene a meeting with the villagers/ stake holders for the purpose of restoration of peace and harmony among different communities in order to instill a sense of security among Christians in the District of Kanker.

(v) Pass any other order(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.”

3. The petitioner, in WPPIL No. 86/2025, has prayed for the following relief(s):

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to remove the notice board from all the villages mentioned above and allow the citizens to move freely as per the Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Police to provide adequate protection to the Christian Pastors and peoples living in the villages.

10.3 That, the cost of the petition may also be given to the petitioner by the respondent authorities.

10.4 Any other relief may also be granted to the Petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in facts and circumstances of the case.”

4. Since the issue involved in both the above Public Interest Litigation petitions are identical, they are being considered and decided by this common order. WPPIL No. 83/2025 is taken as the lead case.

5. That the petitioners are raising the issue of segregation of Christian community and their religious leaders from the mainstream village community. The respondent authorities have circulated a format of resolution, in the Kanker District of Chhattisgarh, wherein the respondent authorities through Department of Panchayat are instructing the Zila Panchayat and Janpad Panchayat and eventually the Gram Panchayat to pass resolution/oath in the name and style "Hamari Parampara Hamari Virasať". According to the petitioners, the real intention of circulating this circular to the Gram Panchayat is to instruct them to pass resolution prohibiting entry of Christian Pastors and the so called 'Converted Christians' in the village. At least 8 Villages of Kanker District have erected hoardings which say that the entry of Pastors and so called 'Converted Christians' is prohibited in the village. These hoardings have created a sense of fear among persons of Christian minority. Apprehending any untoward incident and violence, these persons are not entering the village which they usually used to vi