Why the Delhi High Court Refused to Remove Afzal Guru and Maqbool Bhatt's Graves From Tihar Jail

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking the removal of the graves of Mohammad Afzal Guru and Mohammad Maqbool Bhatt from Tihar Jail, where both

were executed. Guru, convicted in the 2001 Parliament attack case, was hanged in 2013, while Bhatt, co-founder of the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front, was executed in 1984. Both were buried inside the jail premises.A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the plea did not establish any constitutional or legal violation that required intervention. "For approaching the court for a relief in a PIL, you have to show us violation of constitutional rights, fundamental rights or statutory rights. No law or rule prohibits cremation or burial inside the jail premises," the bench observed.Sensing the court's disinclination, the petitioners' counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition and refile it with additional material. The court allowed the request and treated the matter as "dismissed as withdrawn".The petition, filed by Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh and Jitendra Singh, argued that the graves' continued existence inside a state-run prison was "illegal, unconstitutional, and against public interest". It claimed the graves have turned Tihar into a "radical pilgrimage" site where extremist elements gather. Advocate Varun Kumar Sinha, appearing for the petitioners, told the court, "This not only undermines national security and public order, but also sanctifies terrorism in direct contravention of the principles of secularism and rule of law under the Constitution of India."The plea further cited the Delhi Prisons Rules, 2018, which call for disposal of bodies of executed prisoners in a manner that prevents glorification, ensures prison discipline, and maintains public order. It argued that in past cases - including those of Ajmal Kasab and Yakub Memon - authorities took steps to avoid public veneration of terrorists.The bench, however, questioned the assertions, asking where the data was to show that people were visiting the graves to pay homage. With no such evidence presented, the matter was closed after the withdrawal request.