Chandigarh: The case concerning the alleged disappearance of 328 saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is far from an ordinary criminal matter. It touches the core of Sikh religious consciousness, institutional authority, and the boundaries of state intervention as recognised under established law.
For Sikhs, Sri Guru Granth Sahib is revered as the eternal and living Guru. Every physical saroop holds identical spiritual authority and sanctity, an understanding that is unique to Sikhism. Consequently, any unauthorised printing, mishandling, concealment, or disappearance of a saroop is viewed as a grave religious violation. The issue, therefore, transcends administrative or financial irregularities and is directly linked to matters of faith.
Although the issue remained dormant for several years, it has recently resurfaced with significant political intensity following the registration of an FIR by the Punjab Police. This move came despite a 2020 decision not to pursue criminal proceedings and is widely perceived as a challenge to the authority of Sikh religious leadership.
The development has led to a direct confrontation between the Punjab government, led by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, and the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). The SGPC is the apex Sikh body responsible for managing gurdwaras and overseeing the printing of saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. No printing press is permitted to produce a saroop without SGPC authorisation.
While Sikh religious authorities have cautioned against state interference in religious affairs, the Punjab government has maintained that principles of law and accountability apply equally to all institutions, including religious ones. Political parties remain divided on the issue, and the judiciary has already intervened by rejecting anticipatory bail pleas of the accused named in the FIR.
On December 7, the Punjab Police registered an FIR at Police Station C-Division, Amritsar, invoking Sections 295 and 295A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertain to acts intended to outrage religious feelings. The FIR also includes Sections 408, 409, 465, and 120B of the IPC, dealing with criminal breach of trust, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. Additionally, Section 5 of the Punjab Jagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008, governing the unauthorised printing, handling, and disposal of the Sikh scripture, has been invoked.
The FIR names 16 individuals, most of whom are former SGPC officials and employees associated with the publication, storage, and accounting of saroops at Gurdwara Ramsar Sahib in Amritsar.
On December 23, the Punjab Director General of Police (DGP) constituted a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the matter. Shortly thereafter, several of the accused approached courts seeking anticipatory bail. These pleas were rejected by the trial courts in Amritsar.
Multiple bail orders passed in the case were accessed and examined, offering important insights into the allegations, the course of the investigation, and the SGPC’s position. While rejecting the bail pleas, the courts observed that the allegations are grave in nature and directly impact the religious sentiments of the Sikh community at large. The courts further held that custodial interrogation is necessary to trace the missing saroops, recover allegedly forged or destroyed records, and uncover the full scope of the alleged conspiracy. At the core of the case is the allegation that 328 saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji were printed and distributed from the SGPC’s printing facility at Gurdwara Ramsar Sahib during the financial years 2013–14 and 2014–15, without being properly recorded in official ledgers.
The SGPC holds exclusive authority to print and distribute Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, a process governed by stringent religious and administrative protocols. Each saroop is required to be serialised, entered into designated registers, and ceremonially delivered after verification of the location where it is to be installed.
Investigating officers have alleged that these mandatory procedures were bypassed on a significant scale.
According to the investigation, hundreds of saroops were printed and issued outside the official record-keeping system. As a result, the current status of these saroops, their whereabouts or the manner in which they may have been disposed of, cannot be conclusively ascertained.
The case extends beyond the disappearance of physical copies of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and centres on the alleged systematic manipulation of official records. These actions are believed to have concealed the unauthorised printing and distribution of saroops. Investigators have also flagged possible financial irregularities, including concerns related to donations collected for the issuance of the sacred volumes.
The matter first came to light in May 2020, when an SGPC employee, Kanwaljeet Singh, conducted an audit of the publication department’s records as part of his pension clearance process. During the audit, he reportedly discovered that hundreds of saroops were not properly accounted for in official registers. What initially appeared to be a discrepancy involving 267 saroops later increased to 328 following further examination.
At the outset, 267 saroops were believed to be unaccounted for; subsequent scrutiny raised this figure to 328. Given the supreme religious significance of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the disappearance of even a single saroop is regarded as a serious matter within the Sikh community. The scale of the alleged mismanagement in the printing and distribution process alarmed Sikh activists and organisations, who maintained that the issue could not be dismissed as mere clerical negligence and warranted serious scrutiny.
