2. In Sikhism, the Guru is perceived as ubiquitous (Ang-Sang) and the Granth Sahib
is referred to as the ‘True Lord’ (Sacha Patshah), the limbs (pages) as anga, the
daily installation of Granth Sahib in the sanctum sanctorum of the Gurudwara
premises in the dawn as Prakash (literally, radiance) and the retiring of the holy
scripture after the sun goes down as Sukhaasan (literally, the posture of rest) on
the manja sahib (the special bed) in the room for the resting as Sachkhand (the
realm of truth). This meticulous maryada (protocol) of revering the Granth Sahib
as the “Living Guru” distinguishes the Sikh ethos (adabb, literally “honour”) of
scriptural veneration from other religions.
The meaning of Punishment: The maryada or the adabb concerning the Guru
Granth Sahib is of supreme significance for a Sikh practitioner, and non-
adherence to the protocol is stated as beAdbii (dishonour).
3. Reading Sikh history as a continuum, Bhai Ranjit Singh, former jathedar of the
Akal Takht, said, disrespect to the Sikh Gurus, even when it happened in the time
of the Mughals, was beadbi.
“Battles took place over it. And now when the Guru Granth Sahib is the living
Guru, Sikhs can similarly choose to defend its glory in whatever way they deem
fit,”- Bhai Ranjit Singh.
Operation Blue Star, in which the Army entered the Golden Temple or Darbaar
Sahib in Amritsar, the holiest of Sikh shrines, in 1984, to flush out Sikh militants,
is considered the biggest incident of beadbi in modern Sikh history.
“Indira Gandhi (who ordered the Army to enter the Golden Temple) paid a price for
it with her life. Men in uniform, whether from the Army or police, have not been
allowed to enter the gurdwara in uniform ever since,”-Dharam Singh
4. For some years now, Punjab has topped the country in the number of sacrilege
cases. Data from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) shows that from
2018 to 2020, Punjab’s rate of crimes (number of cases divided by population in
lakhs) registered under Sections 295 to 297 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which
deal with sacrilege, was the highest.
In 2018, Punjab’s sacrilege crime rate was 0.7 per cent, while in other states
across the country this ranged between 0.1 and 0.4 per cent. The figure for Punjab
was 0.6 per cent in 2019 and 0.5 per cent in 2020.
In 2017, when the NCRB first started giving data about these crimes, Goa
registered the highest rate at 0.8 per cent, and Punjab was second highest at 0.6
per cent. The total number of cases registered in Punjab from 2017 to 2020 was
721.
5. For all incidents of sacrilege in Punjab, police invoke Sections 295 and 295A of the IPC. The
punishment is two years’ imprisonment in the case of Section 295, which involves destruction,
damage to or defiling of a “place of worship”, or “any object held sacred”.
Section 295A provides for three years of imprisonment for the “deliberate and malicious
intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens”.
Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code states that deliberate and malicious acts intended to
outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs shall be
punished. The 267th Report of the Law Commission of India defined “hate speech” as an
expression that is likely to cause distress, offend or incite violence against individuals based on
the particular group they’re associated with. Blasphemy – though the phrase “blasphemy” isn’t
explicitly mentioned anywhere in the Constitution – is defined as the act of insulting or showing
contempt or lack of reverence for God. However, it is made clear that any speech that threatens
public harmony or incites violence against a particular group in society will be punished.
“The years of imprisonment listed in these laws are too little. Here, we are talking about sacrilege
to a living Guru, not a book or an object. We have been demanding that the punishment in the
case of the Guru Granth Sahib be increased to 20 years,”- Bhai Ranjit Singh.
6. Although abolished in England in 2008, blasphemy (or ‘treason against God’) is an
offence essential to the survival of multi-religious societies such as India. Blasphemy
(or sacrilege) is calculated to disrupt public order and must therefore be punished. He
added that section 295A was upheld as constitutionally valid by a five-judge bench of
the Supreme Court in Ramji Lal Modi’s case. The same argument applies to the other
offence, Section 295. Peculiar to Christianity, the offence of blasphemy was secularised
by the British colonial regime while enacting the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in 1860, and
made applicable to all religions in Section 295.
Section 295A, was added to the IPC in 1927, against the backdrop of highly charged
religious feelings among Muslims that were triggered by the judgment of the Punjab
High Court in the Rangila Rasul case. After 1961, the precise boundary between
Section 295 and 295A has become rather blurred, and both sections may be invoked to
penalise the same sacrilegious conduct.
“If I were a judge in India, I should have no scruples about punishing a Christian who
should pollute a mosque,”- Thomas Babington Macaulay
