Missing Saroop case: HC grants interim anticipatory bail to 61-year-old accused

The Amritsar Police Commissionerate booked Kulwant Singh under FIR No. 168 at the Division-C police station on December 7, 2025. The FIR invokes serious charges under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including hurting religious sentiments, criminal breach of trust, forgery, conspiracy, and offences under the Jagat Jot Shri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008.

The case was initiated at the instance of Sikh Sadbhavna Dal representatives, who alleged that 328 sacred saroops of the Guru Granth Sahib, earlier in the custody of the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), were found missing in 2016.

According to the prosecution, an SGPC-constituted inquiry committee reported large-scale irregularities, including unauthorised printing, distribution, disappearance and alleged mishandling of sacred scriptures, along with financial misappropriation of Rs 9,82,700. It was further alleged that records were forged or destroyed to conceal the wrongdoing.

Investigators claim that Kulwant Singh, who worked as a contract bookbinder (Jild Saaz), prepared 61 saroops from excess scripture pages without written approval and without maintaining official records, allegedly acting on verbal directions from senior officials.

The prosecution also referred to a fire incident at Gurdwara Ramsar in Amritsar on May 19, 2016, in which several saroops were reportedly damaged. Subsequent inquiry reports in 2018 and 2020 allegedly highlighted forgery of records and destruction of official documents. It was contended that excess pages, over 12 lakh, were supplied to the petitioner between 2012 and 2020 without proper accounting.

Opposing the bail plea, the state and the complainant’s counsel argued that custodial interrogation was necessary to recover the missing saroops and to unearth the alleged conspiracy.

However, the court took note of several factors highlighted by advocate Vivek K Thakur and advocate Uday Singh Cheema, advocates for petitioner Kulwant Singh.

The points considered by the court while granting interim anticipatory bail to the accused included: the petitioner is a 61-year-old senior citizen with no criminal antecedents; he was not an employee of the SGPC but worked on a contractual basis; there was no material on record directly attributing any act of disrespect toward the holy scripture to him; FIR was lodged after a delay of over nine-and-a-half years, without satisfactory explanation; SGPC itself did not lodge the FIR; the evidence appeared largely documentary in nature; and there was no indication that the petitioner would tamper with evidence or fail to cooperate.

The court also noted that any necessary recovery or questioning could be facilitated by directing the petitioner to join the investigation rather than subjecting him to custodial interrogation.