CRM-M-9802 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT Satinder Singh State of Punjab CORAM: Argued by SURYA PARTAP SINGH with regard to 409, 465, of Jagat Jot Shri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008 added Station C abovementioned FIR came int ‘Sikh Sadbhavna Dal’ was stated by the above books) of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’, which were in the cus ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’, Sri Amritsar Sahib, found missing 9802-2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Singh VERSUS Punjab CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Argued by : Mr. P.S. Guliani, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.I.P. Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr. Pradeep Virk, Sr. Advocate Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate for the complainant. ***** SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J. This petition for pre-arrest bail with regard to FIR No.168 dated 07.12.2025 409, 465, and 120-B of Indian Penal Code (Section 408 of IPC and Section 5 of Jagat Jot Shri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008 added C Division, District Police Commisionerate Amritsar abovementioned FIR came into being at the instance of ‘Sikh Sadbhavna Dal’, hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It was stated by the above-named complainant that books) of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’, which were in the cus ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’, Sri Amritsar Sahib, missing in the year 2016. -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9802-2026 (O&M) Reserved on : 06.03.2026 Pronounced on : 10.03.2026 ..... Petitioner VERSUS ..... Respondent SURYA PARTAP SINGH for the petitioner. Mr. P.I.P. Singh, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Sr. Advocate with , Advocate for the complainant. ***** arrest bail has been filed by the petitioner 07.12.2025 under Sections 295, 295 B of Indian Penal Code (Section 408 of IPC and Section 5 of Jagat Jot Shri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008 added later on), Police Police Commisionerate Amritsar. The at the instance of representatives of , hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It named complainant that 328 sacred saroops (holy books) of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’, which were in the custody of ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’, Sri Amritsar Sahib, were O&M) ..... Petitioner ..... Respondent by the petitioner 295, 295-A, B of Indian Penal Code (Section 408 of IPC and Section 5 Police The representatives of , hereinafter being referred to as ‘complainant’ only. It 328 sacred saroops (holy tody of were GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 2. in connivance with each other were involved in unauthorized printing, distribution, disappearance and mishandling of sacred saroops, misappropriation and commission of institution. It has also been alleged that evidence pertaining to abovementioned acts has been destroyed and the religiou Sikh community have been hurt. The above upon the report of the fact ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’ hereinafter being referred to as ‘SGPC’, Sri Amritsa 3. information, was taken up. was found that the petitio (Finance), damaged copies of prosecution, the petitioner obtain approval from the Internal Committee the irregularities committed by 4. heard. 5. is a 52 years working as an employee of SGPC since 18.03.2008 and his services were regularized on 27.02.2009. According to learne 9802-2026 (O&M) It has been alleged by the complainant that the accused persons in connivance with each other were involved in unauthorized printing, distribution, disappearance and mishandling of sacred saroops, propriation and commission of fraud, worth Rs.9,82,700/ institution. It has also been alleged that evidence pertaining to abovementioned acts has been destroyed and the religiou Sikh community have been hurt. The above upon the report of the fact-finding/inquiry Committee constituted by the ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’ hereinafter being referred to as ‘SGPC’, Sri Amritsar Sahib. It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned information, the formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation taken up. According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it was found that the petitioner, who was working as (Finance), was responsible for maintaining accounts and records relating to damaged copies of the Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib prosecution, the petitioner failed to maintain proper records obtain approval from the Internal Committee the irregularities committed by the co-accused Arguments addressed on behalf of all the parties have been It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the years old person, having no criminal antecedents, and that he working as an employee of SGPC since 18.03.2008 and his services were regularized on 27.02.2009. According to learne -2- It has been alleged by the complainant that the accused persons in connivance with each other were involved in unauthorized printing, distribution, disappearance and mishandling of sacred saroops, fraud, worth Rs.9,82,700/-, with institution. It has also been alleged that evidence pertaining to abovementioned acts has been destroyed and the religious sentiments of Sikh community have been hurt. The abovementioned allegations are based finding/inquiry Committee constituted by the ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’ hereinafter being referred to It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it was working as Assistant Secretary for maintaining accounts and records relating to Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to maintain proper records, and did no obtain approval from the Internal Committee to write-off, and did not report accused. Arguments addressed on behalf of all the parties have been It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the petitioner having no criminal antecedents, and that he was working as an employee of SGPC since 18.03.2008 and his services were regularized on 27.02.2009. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, It has been alleged by the complainant that the accused persons in connivance with each other were involved in unauthorized printing, distribution, disappearance and mishandling of sacred saroops, the institution. It has also been alleged that evidence pertaining to s sentiments of allegations are based finding/inquiry Committee constituted by the ‘Shriomani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee’ hereinafter being referred to It is the case of the prosecution that in view of abovementioned formal FIR of this case was lodged and the investigation According to prosecution, during the course of investigation it Assistant Secretary for maintaining accounts and records relating to . According to and did not off, and did not report Arguments addressed on behalf of all the parties have been petitioner was working as an employee of SGPC since 18.03.2008 and his services were d counsel for the petitioner, GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 on 29.04.2011, the services of petitioner were confirmed as employee Secretary’, dealing with binding and wor the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a complaint filed by abovementioned allegations have been levelled aga with 15 other co there are allegations with regard to Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ forgery of records, sacrilege and disrespect of the 6. also contended that on 19.05.2016, a fire Gurudwara with regard to learned counsel for the petitioner, the abovesaid Inquiry Committee submitted its rep Balwinder Singh, General Secretary, ‘Sikh Sadhbhavna Dal’, filed application under Section 156(3) CrPC Magistrate, Amritsar for issuing a direction to the police for the offences With regard to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the abovementioned application did not find favour in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, but thereafter, 9802-2026 (O&M) on 29.04.2011, the services of petitioner were confirmed as employee, as Accountant, and later, he was promoted as ‘Assistant Secretary’, dealing with the Department of purchase, trust, publication, binding and work of press. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a complaint filed by a member of ‘Sikh Sadbhavana Dal’ abovementioned allegations have been levelled aga 15 other co-accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, there are allegations with regard to disappearance of 328 Guru Granth Sahib Ji’, and also of indulging forgery of records, misappropriation of funds and acts amounting to sacrilege and disrespect of the Holy Scripture In addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that on 19.05.2016, a fire Gurudwara Ramsar, Amritsar, wherein several with regard to above, an enquiry was conducted learned counsel for the petitioner, the abovesaid Inquiry Committee submitted its report on 23.08.2020, and Balwinder Singh, General Secretary, ‘Sikh Sadhbhavna Dal’, filed application under Section 156(3) CrPC, before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar for issuing a direction to the police for the offences under Sections 295-A, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120 With regard to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the abovementioned application did not find favour in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, but thereafter, -3- on 29.04.2011, the services of petitioner were confirmed as a permanent and later, he was promoted as ‘Assistant Department of purchase, trust, publication, According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a member of ‘Sikh Sadbhavana Dal’, and that the abovementioned allegations have been levelled against the petitioner along accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, disappearance of 328 Saroops of ‘Shri of indulging in unauthorized printing, misappropriation of funds and acts amounting to Holy Scripture. n addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also contended that on 19.05.2016, a fire broke out in the premises of wherein several Saroops were damaged and above, an enquiry was conducted by a Committee. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the abovesaid Inquiry Committee had , and thereafter one person, namely Balwinder Singh, General Secretary, ‘Sikh Sadhbhavna Dal’, filed before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar for issuing a direction to the police to register the FIR A, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120-B of IPC With regard to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the abovementioned application did not find favour in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, but thereafter, on account of political clout permanent and later, he was promoted as ‘Assistant Department of purchase, trust, publication, According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of a , and that the along accused. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, of ‘Shri in unauthorized printing, misappropriation of funds and acts amounting to n addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has the premises of and . As per had thereafter one person, namely Balwinder Singh, General Secretary, ‘Sikh Sadhbhavna Dal’, filed an before the Court of learned Judicial FIR B of IPC. With regard to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out the abovementioned application did not find favour in the Court of the GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 complainant managed to get the FIR lodged under the aforesaid Sections 07.12.2025. 7. petitioner that firstly has been lodged after a thirdly, ‘SGPC’, who conducted enquiry never opted to file any complaint misappropriation responsible for collection and deposit of 8. also argued that after a delay of petitioner collected by the and large, of the petitioner 9. Counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended on behalf of respondents is a statutory body and that ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ Hon’ble Apex Court. matter in que destruction of record of SGPC, Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ the ‘SGPC’ of fire was reported 9802-2026 (O&M) complainant managed to get the FIR lodged under the aforesaid Sections 07.12.2025. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that firstly, the petitioner is an old has been lodged after a huge delay of more than nine ‘SGPC’, who conducted enquiry never opted to file any complaint/FIR against the petitioner and fourthly propriation is attributable to one ‘Kanwaljit Singh’, who was responsible for collection and deposit of money In addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that after a delay of 9 ½ years, th petitioner will not produce any favourable result, and that the evidence to be collected by the investigating agency during the course of investigation, , is the documentary evidence and therefore, of the petitioner is not likely to produce any result The learned State Counsel being assisted by learned Senior Counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended on behalf of respondents is a statutory body having been originated from Sikh Gurudwara Act, 1925, and that ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ has been declared Hon’ble Apex Court. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the matter in question pertains to forgery, fabrication, tampering of evidence, destruction of record of SGPC, and the Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ by the senior management officials and sewadar ‘SGPC’ right from 2013-14 onwards, and that of fire was reported at ‘Gurudwara Ramsar, Amritsar’ -4- complainant managed to get the FIR lodged under the aforesaid Sections, It has been further contended by learned counsel for the ner is an old-age person; secondly, the FIR delay of more than nine-and-a-half years; ‘SGPC’, who conducted enquiry never opted to file any and fourthly, the alleged financial attributable to one ‘Kanwaljit Singh’, who was money pertaining to Holy Saroops. In addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has years, the custodial interrogation of the any favourable result, and that the evidence to be during the course of investigation, and therefore, custodial interrogation is not likely to produce any result. The learned State Counsel being assisted by learned Senior Counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned arguments. It has been contended on behalf of respondents that the ‘SGPC’ having been originated from Sikh Gurudwara Act, 1925, has been declared the juristic person, According to learned counsel for the respondents, the stion pertains to forgery, fabrication, tampering of evidence, and the sacrilege and disrespect of ‘Shri senior management officials and sewadars 14 onwards, and that on 19.05.2016, an incident at ‘Gurudwara Ramsar, Amritsar’, and it was alleged , on It has been further contended by learned counsel for the age person; secondly, the FIR half years; ‘SGPC’, who conducted enquiry never opted to file any the alleged financial attributable to one ‘Kanwaljit Singh’, who was pertaining to Holy Saroops. In addition to above, the learned counsel for the petitioner has e custodial interrogation of the any favourable result, and that the evidence to be during the course of investigation, by interrogation The learned State Counsel being assisted by learned Senior Counsel for the complainant, has controverted the abovementioned ‘SGPC’ having been originated from Sikh Gurudwara Act, 1925, , by According to learned counsel for the respondents, the stion pertains to forgery, fabrication, tampering of evidence, sacrilege and disrespect of ‘Shri s of on 19.05.2016, an incident alleged GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 that 80 saroops of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ got damaged due to electrocution and fire. 10. ‘SGPC’ had submitted by the Inquiry Committee to the management wherein destruction of records, f by the officials and senior management learned counsel for the respondents, on the abovementioned report was taken and the persons reported to be involved in the abovemention illegal activities contended by learned counsel for the respondent fact speaks in volumes about the nexus between the culprit and the senior management officials. 11. respondents that Enquiry Commission abovementioned Commission submitted its report on 23.08.2020 learned Senior Counsel on the basis of abovesaid report, the cases would be filed and legal action would be taken by Singh Dhami, the then General Secretary of contended by learned counsel for the respondents that the abovementioned Enquiry Commission had found that there was no record Scriptures command and control of contended by learned Senior C 9802-2026 (O&M) that 80 saroops of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ got damaged due to electrocution and fire. According to learned Senior C had enquired into the matter and submitted by the Inquiry Committee to the management wherein it was reported that forgery of record/bills/ledger/vouchers, destruction of records, fabrication of evide by the officials and senior management office bearers learned counsel for the respondents, on the abovementioned report was taken and the persons reported to be involved in the abovemention illegal activities were retained on the same post. In view of above it has been contended by learned counsel for the respondent speaks in volumes about the nexus between the culprit and the senior management officials. It has also been contended by learned respondents that in August, 2020, the Enquiry Commission, vide Resolution No.368 dated 12.07.2020, and the abovementioned Commission submitted its report on 23.08.2020 learned Senior Counsel on the basis of abovesaid report, the cases would be filed and legal action would be taken by Singh Dhami, the then General Secretary of contended by learned counsel for the respondents that the abovementioned Enquiry Commission had found that there was no record Scriptures of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’, which command and control of petitioner and his co contended by learned Senior Counsel for the respondents that -5- that 80 saroops of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ got damaged due to Senior Counsel for the respondents, the matter and a report dated 23.10.2018 was submitted by the Inquiry Committee to the management of the ‘SGPC’ it was reported that forgery of record/bills/ledger/vouchers, abrication of evidence was committed, at large scale, office bearers of the ‘SGPC’. As per learned counsel for the respondents, on the abovementioned report no action was taken and the persons reported to be involved in the abovemention were retained on the same post. In view of above it has been contended by learned counsel for the respondents that the abovementioned speaks in volumes about the nexus between the culprit and the senior It has also been contended by learned Senior Counsel for the the ‘SGPC’ constituted a High-Level vide Resolution No.368 dated 12.07.2020, and the abovementioned Commission submitted its report on 23.08.2020. As per learned Senior Counsel on the basis of abovesaid report, it was resolved that the cases would be filed and legal action would be taken by Sh. Harjinder Singh Dhami, the then General Secretary of the ‘SGPC’. It has also been contended by learned counsel for the respondents that the abovementioned Enquiry Commission had found that there was no record of 328 Holy h Sahib Ji’, which (the record) was under the petitioner and his co-accused. It has also been ounsel for the respondents that on the basis of that 80 saroops of ‘Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji’ got damaged due to ounsel for the respondents, the report dated 23.10.2018 was ‘SGPC’, it was reported that forgery of record/bills/ledger/vouchers, , at large scale, ‘SGPC’. As per no action was taken and the persons reported to be involved in the abovementioned were retained on the same post. In view of above it has been that the abovementioned speaks in volumes about the nexus between the culprit and the senior ounsel for the Level vide Resolution No.368 dated 12.07.2020, and the . As per it was resolved that Sh. Harjinder . It has also been contended by learned counsel for the respondents that the abovementioned Holy was under the also been on the basis of GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 abovementioned enquiry report, petitioner No.1305 dated 27.08.2020. 12. crime, it has been contended by learned that he was responsible for maintaining accounts and records relating to damaged copies of Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the petitioner failed to maintain proper records and did not obtain approval from the Internal did not report the irregularities committed by claiming that learned Senior C petitioner is necessary for the respondent offence committed by the petitioner played by the petitioner, 13. 14. the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration, decision:- i) ii) iii) 9802-2026 (O&M) abovementioned enquiry report, disciplinary action was taken a petitioner and he was suspended by the No.1305 dated 27.08.2020. With regard to the role of petitioner crime, it has been contended by learned Senior C was responsible for maintaining accounts and records relating to damaged copies of Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the petitioner failed to maintain proper records and did not obtain approval from the Internal did not report the irregularities committed by claiming that huge amount has been embezzled Senior Counsel for the respondents that r is necessary. It has also been argued by for the respondents that in view of serious ramifications and offence committed by the petitioner and his co by the petitioner, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail. The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration, - i) that the petitioner is a 52-year ii) that there is nothing on record to show that any disrespect to the Holy Scriptures has been committed by the petitioner; iii) that the FIR has been lodged after a lot of delay and there is no proper explanation for the same; -6- disciplinary action was taken against the was suspended by the managing body SGPC, vide order role of petitioner, in the commission of Senior Counsel for the respondents was responsible for maintaining accounts and records relating to damaged copies of Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the petitioner failed to maintain proper records and did not obtain approval from the Internal Committee to write-off, and did not report the irregularities committed by the co-accused. While huge amount has been embezzled, it has been contended by ounsel for the respondents that custodial interrogation of the . It has also been argued by the learned Senior Counsel serious ramifications and gravity of and his co-accused, and also the role itled for anticipatory bail. The record has been perused carefully. A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are the relevant factors which are required to be taken into consideration, for a year-old person; that there is nothing on record to show that any disrespect to the Holy Scriptures has been committed by the petitioner; that the FIR has been lodged after a lot of delay and there is no proper explanation for the same; gainst the vide order in the commission of ounsel for the respondents was responsible for maintaining accounts and records relating to damaged copies of Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib. According to learned counsel for the respondents, the petitioner failed to maintain proper records off, and While it has been contended by of the ounsel gravity of accused, and also the role A perusal of record shows that in the present case, following are for a that there is nothing on record to show that any disrespect to the that the FIR has been lodged after a lot of delay and there is no GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-9802 iv) v) vi) vii) viii) ix) x) 15. 10.03.2026 Gaurav Thakur 9802-2026 (O&M) iv) that the FIR has not been lodged by the SGPC, who is responsible for the religious affairs; v) that the evidence to be collected by the Investigating Agency is by and large, documentary in nature, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not going to pro favourable result; vi) that otherwise also if anything is to be the petitioner, the same can be facilitated by issuing a direction to the petitioner to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer to d vii) that the petitioner has already joined in the investigation; viii) that the investigation and trial are not likely to be concluded in near future; ix) x) .2026 Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable -7- as not been lodged by the SGPC, who is responsible for the religious affairs; that the evidence to be collected by the Investigating Agency is documentary in nature, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not going to produce any that otherwise also if anything is to be recovered/enquired from the petitioner, the same can be facilitated by issuing a direction to the petitioner to join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer to do; the petitioner has already joined in the investigation; the investigation and trial are not likely to be concluded in (SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Yes/No as not been lodged by the SGPC, who is that the evidence to be collected by the Investigating Agency is documentary in nature, and therefore, custodial duce any enquired from the petitioner, the same can be facilitated by issuing a direction to the petitioner to join the investigation as and when called by the investigation and trial are not likely to be concluded in ) GAURAV THAKUR 2026.03.10 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document