Public trust, not personal fiefdom: Punjab and Haryana High Court asks Ludhiana Dera chief to reveal bank records

“The property in question is not the exclusive or individual property of any of the litigating parties; rather, it belongs to the Dera, which is imbued with a public character. The court, therefore, bears an obligation to ensure that the properties of the Dera are neither misutilised nor mismanaged,” the high court said. 

What were the allegations against Dera Head?

• The court takes note that specific allegations and instances against the head of Dera, such as the purchase of a Mercedes-Benz car in June 2021 from Dera funds, as well as two other vehicles. It was also claimed that one Mercedes purchased in the year 2005, and the Toyota Land Cruiser purchased in August 2017, are allegedly from Dera funds.
• It was mentioned that he was guilty of a series of acts of mismanagement at the level of the Dera and had acted beyond the powers conferred upon him, in derogation of the expected “maryada” attached to the office of head of the Dera.
• The allegations also say that Baba is using funds of the Dera to engage personal security guards and indulged in a display of authority and influence before fellow Sadhus by projecting the strength of such security personnel. 
• It has been claimed that Baba had, on several occasions, confessed his misconduct, tendered apologies, and assured that he would not repeat such acts.

• However, he allegedly failed to reform and instead became increasingly indifferent, indulging openly in worldly luxuries and conveniences, conduct stated to be unbecoming of a Sadhu and, a fortiori, of the head of the prestigious Dera Nirmal Kutiya, Johalan.
• It was alleged that Baba started taking advantage of the fact that certain movable and immovable properties of the Dera stood recorded in his name, began asserting exclusive ownership over the same and initiated negotiations for alienation with the intent to secure wrongful gain to himself and to cause wrongful loss to the Dera. 
• It is further alleged that the properties standing in his individual name were, in fact, acquired from the offerings and funds of the Dera and, therefore, vested in the Dera. 

Observation: ‘Direction to reveal account details of Dera’

• The appellate court has correctly observed that the properties of the Dera do not vest in any individual in a personal capacity, but are to be administered and utilised exclusively for the welfare of the Sadhus associated with the Dera and are required to be properly managed in accordance with its objects and traditions. 
• The allegations are centred on mismanagement and misappropriation of the funds and properties of the Dera, and therefore, the financial and property records assume central significance in this matter. 
• The appellate court has not taken the strong action of appointing a receiver but merely directed Baba Jeet Singh to submit proper accounts of Dera with a view to preserving and safeguarding the suit property during the pendency of the proceedings.

• The high court decided to take both the revision petitions together to decide the matter, as both the pleas arise out of the same civil case and involve interconnected issues. 
• The revision petition filed by the petitioner is allowed, but Baba’s plea is dismissed.
• The trial court erred in declining production of financial records relating to income, expenditure, donations, bank accounts and assets of the Dera, as these were relevant to the determination of the issues involved in the suit.

Case: Mismanagement claims at Dera

• The petitioner filed a case seeking a decree of declaration, permanent injunction, and mandatory injunction to validly remove Baba Jeet Singh from the position of head of Dera Nirmal Kutiya.
• He also sought the consequential reliefs, restraining the Baba from alienating or dealing with the assets and accounts of the Dera.
• Jaspal also requests the appointment of a receiver to manage the affairs of the Dera. 
• He additionally moved an application seeking the production of certain documents. 
• The application was partly allowed on August 6, 2025, but the request for the production of bank records was declined. 
• Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application on August 19, 2025, for depositing the diet money for summoning witnesses, which was allowed, and a bank official from Punjab National Bank, along with the relevant record, was ordered to be summoned. 
• Baba Jeet Singh then decided to move an application seeking the recall of the summoning order inciting the August 6 order. The trial court allowed the same through a December 2025 order.
• Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed this present revision petition. 
• On the other hand, Baba Jeet Singh also preferred a revision petition challenging the order of December 2025, whereby the application of the petitioner for the appointment of a receiver was declined. 
• The appellate court, while upholding the dismissal of the application for appointment of a receiver, directed Baba Jeet Singh to produce financial statements of the income and assets of the Dera to preserve the property of the Dera. 
• Aggrieved by the said direction, Baba Jeet Singh filed a present revision petition.

‘Head of Dera can be trustee at best’

• Appearing for Sant Jaspal, Senior Advocate Rahul Sharma argued that the trial court’s order is not maintainable since the records of the financial transactions and bank accounts of the Deraa, as well as the Baat Jeet Singh, were relevant
• Sharma also alleged that Baba Jeet Singh should be removed from the position of head of the Dera on account of mismanagement and misappropriation of its funds, and for utilising the movable and immovable properties of the Dera for his personal gain. 
• He argued that the trial court declined the production of the said documents solely on the premise that they were not relevant, which makes the court’s finding erroneous. 
• He further mentioned that the trial court’s order of December 2025 had rightly directed Baba to produce the records of the income and expenditure of the Dera, as well as the details of its movable and immovable properties. 
• It is submitted that the said direction does not require any interference and has been viewed to preserve the properties of the Dera, which are public in character and do not vest in Baba in his individual capacity. 
• Sharma also pointed out that, at best, Baba Jeet Singh, who is the head of the Dera, can be regarded as a trustee holding the properties on behalf of the devotees of the Dera. 

‘Rightly rejected inspection of Dera’s accounts’

• On the contrary, appearing for Baba Jeet Singh, advocate Sangram Singh Saron argued that the previous order declining production of documents and recalling the summoning of the clerk of Punjab National Bank was rightly passed. 
• Singh also argued that once the trial court had declined the application for production of documents on the ground of irrelevance, the attempt to examine a witness for proving those very documents would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.
• He further added that the application for production of documents moved by Sant Singh was rightly rejected as a party cannot seek discovery or production of documents merely to enable it to fish out material for building its case.
• Singh also mentioned that the opposite party can only be compelled to produce documents upon which it seeks to rely, and the court is obliged to call for documents from a party only when it finds the same to be relevant and necessary for adjudication.