The Kerala High Court has ordered a Dignified Burial for a 71-year-old Indian man whose body had been lying in a hospital mortuary in the UAE for about a year and a half because his relatives could not agree on where he should be laid to rest, holding that respect for the dead is part of the right under Article 21.
Kochi: The Kerala High Court has directed the police in Kollam to ensure a dignified burial for Robert Francis Sahayan, an Indian citizen who died in the United Arab Emirates on March 26, 2025 and whose mortal remains stayed in Ajman for nearly one and a half years amid a family dispute, and has permitted his niece to conduct the funeral rites at St. Andrew’s Church, Sasthamcotta, with the consent of the church authorities [Mary Victoria v. Ministry of External Affairs and Others].
Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan passed the order on October 28, 2026 in a writ petition filed by the deceased’s niece, Mary Victoria, who sought directions to bring the body back to Kerala for burial at the family tomb.
The case
According to the petition, Robert Francis Sahayan, aged 71, died by suicide in the UAE, and his body had since been kept at the forensic laboratory of a hospital in Ajman. His niece wanted the remains repatriated for burial in Kollam, while his nephew, impleaded as an additional respondent, sought to conduct the funeral in the UAE itself. The conflicting requests left the Indian Consulate unable to proceed with repatriation.
On October 22, 2026, the Court directed the Ministry of External Affairs and the Indian Consulate to arrange for the body to be brought back, with the niece bearing the expenses. When the matter came up again on October 28, the Court expressed concern that a disagreement over the place of burial had kept the body unburied for so long.
What the Court said
The Court held that a dispute among relatives over whether the burial should take place at the family tomb in India or abroad cannot indefinitely delay it. Ensuring a decent burial, it said, is the duty of relatives, of society, and ultimately of the State when others fail.
“It is the duty of each and every one of us to see that the dead body of a person is buried decently, whether he is a poor man or a wealthy man. There is no ‘poor man’s dead body’ or ‘wealthy man’s dead body’. Let us not call it like that. Death has erased those distinctions. The mortal remains of all human beings are similar. A dead body deserves no label, but it deserves respect and dignity. This is part of the right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Noting that the nephew could take part in the funeral if he wished but could not create any problem at the function, the Court considered it necessary to bring in the jurisdictional police. It suo motu impleaded the Station House Officers of the Thekkumbhagam and Sasthamcotta police stations and the District Medical Officer, Kollam, as additional respondents, observing that the condition of a body arriving from another country about one and a half years after death had to be looked into by a competent authority.
The Court also made it clear that any dispute over property left behind by the deceased can be pursued separately and should not stand in the way of his burial.
The directions
In addition to its October 22 order, the Court directed that:
- The petitioner shall inform the additional respondents in advance of the date on which the body is to be received.
- On receiving that intimation, the two Station House Officers shall ensure that no law-and-order problem arises until the burial is completed, and that the remains are given a dignified and decent burial.
- The petitioner is free to perform the funeral rites in accordance with the religious ceremony, and the burial is to be conducted at St. Andrew’s Church, Sasthamcotta, West Kallada, Kollam, with the consent of the church authorities.
- The burial shall be completed within four days of the petitioner receiving the body, and the District Medical Officer, Kollam, shall arrange to preserve the body until then, with the petitioner meeting the expenses, if any.
The registry was asked to send a copy of the order to the Government Pleader for communication to the newly impleaded respondents. The matter will be taken up again on November 26, 2026.
Why the order matters
Courts have long held that the right to dignity under Article 21 does not end with death and extends to a decent burial or cremation. This order applies that principle to a practical problem that families of Indians who die abroad often face: repatriation stalls when relatives disagree, and the body waits in a foreign mortuary while the dispute runs on.
By separating the burial from any property dispute, setting a four-day deadline and placing the local police and health authorities under specific duties, the Court turned a constitutional principle into enforceable steps, and made clear that a family quarrel cannot be allowed to hold the dead hostage.
Case Title: Mary Victoria v. Ministry of External Affairs and Others [WP(C) No. 35189 of 2025]
Bench: Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, Kerala High Court
Date of Order: October 28, 2026
Counsel for Petitioner: Dhanesh V. Madhavan, Muhammed Shadi Shabeeb P.S., Devika K.R.
Counsel for Respondents: O.M. Shalina, Deputy Solicitor General of India (Union and MEA); Jawahar Jose (NORKA ROOTS); Gokul R. Nair and S. Sivachalam (additional fourth respondent)
If you or someone you know is struggling, please reach out for help. Tele-MANAS, the Government of India’s mental health helpline, is available 24×7 at 14416 or 1-800-891-4416.