u/sheer-blanket

In my previous posts 1, 2 i highlighted issues with the newly brought Anti-sacrilege amendments from a non-religious perspective. In short its a dracorian law.

SGPC jathedaar, today held a press conference. They are also not happy with most of it from a religious perspective. They voiced that the government didn't consult them beforehand and didn't have the authority to make such guidelines without the consensus of SGPC. They refused to adhere to the new guidelines brought by the law and

urged everyone to read the actual bill itself. Actual bill.

Most of his points were on religious grounds and it's effect on general perception about Sikhism. But even he briefly touched upon the vagueness of the "religious sentiments being hurt" point.

Although he agreed on increasing minimum punishment from 10 yrs to 20yrs, but he didn't mention anything on max punishment of life sentence. Also agreed on need to prevent sacrilege events and punish culprits.

SGPC gave an ultimatum of 15 days to take back the amendments.

Now people can debate, how relevant/neutral SGPC is, for being the voice of the religious side but better to focus on their logic for it. If it actually holds and makes sense ?

I'm a human. The conference is 43 min long. There is a lot of stuff I didn't cover. Hence for surity verify it on your end by watching the conference above.

Ending with, if non-religious people aren't happy, SGPC isn't happy, certain religious people aren't happy, was bringing these amendments in their current form a good solution to an actual problem? How come no party in the assembly object it ? Party in power literally claimed that they consulted with legal & religious scholars before bringing it. Who were those consultants ? Funny thing, AAP government is literally celebrating the approval of these amendments by "Shukrana Yatra" of 3 days.

There used to be time like before Covid, when skincare as concept wasn't common (could be geographical bias) but after Covid everyone is so on it. Genuinely caring for skin is perfectly fine but what's the point of skincare products when you aren't eating right ? Also is everyone into skincare products these days ? If yes how do you approach it and why do you do it ?

Source - TOI

After my previous post, comments and i myself felt that there are some tangential points which should also be covered. So here they are. Disclaimer: This post would not cover "Whether blasphemy (with malice or constructive intent) of any religion be punitive by law." That deserves its own post & discussion.

Sacrilege is a prelevant issue in Punjab and its numbers have been climbing.

>597 Total sacrilege cases registered in Punjab from 2015 till 2026
44 ended in conviction — 7% conviction rate
99 acquittal (not guilty)
83 cancelled during investigation
37 quashed by courts & 102 remain untraced.

"Of the 791 accused identified over the period, the identity of 192 could not be established."
15% and 30% of the accused were "mentally unstable" or of "unsound mind"

Mob lynching & justice
Given such low trust in state machinery & "instant justice" belief of some believers, there have been number of incidents of mob lynching & violence. They have resulted in instant death merely on accusations (some later found untrue), right infront of police. "32 accused died during the pendency of cases." So the demand to fix this (a law / reform) has been there since long time.

Here is a catch.

>70 of 99 acquittals (found not guilty) were due to lack of evidence. Other cases collapsed due to hostile witnesses, non-appearance during trial, compromise between parties, and failure to establish motive.

"In several instances, CCTV footage was not secured in time, crime scenes were not preserved, and forensic corroboration was absent. Some FIRs were also registered under public pressure without sufficient evidentiary basis — cases that could not sustain judicial scrutiny."

So whats the point of strictening punishment when investigatory incompetence is one of issue ? Same day new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for investigation to sacrilege of all holy scriptures were released with aim to address these incompetencies. They upgraded to instructions as per BNS 2023 (could be wrong but it was due already) & amendments specific instructions.

>At the scene of crime, a dual-perimeter cordon, inner for evidence and outer for crowd control, is mandatory. Psychological evaluation of acussed asap. Investigations must be completed within 90 days for offences punishable with seven years or more, and 60 days in other cases. High-resolution photography and videography must precede all evidence collection.

>Digital sacrilege gets its own dedicated chapter. Morphed images, deepfake videos, meme-based desecration, and content amplified across WhatsApp, Telegram and Instagram must be treated as serious offences. Officers must capture URLs, timestamps and device fingerprints before seeking urgent takedown requests from Meta, X and YouTube.

For a layman these sops came after amendments but sops could be announced even without bills. Some (not all) of sops are a result of BNS 2023 guidelines, and should have been upgraded long ago but they didnt. Hence the credit will go to new amendments. Masterstroke.

Now some additional (to my previous post) problems of the bill.
Once accused, suspect could be arrested on day 1 itself. They will stay in jail for at least several months before verdict. Even if they are found innocent, public trial would have happened, livelihood, respect, dignity, family member (optional) & mental health all gone. False accuser roams freely without any consequences. There is no symmetry of punishment for deliberate false accusation, mob provoker/lyncher, misinformants of social media & corrupt investigative officer. After all, the cost of being guilty is life imprisonment. Also I ain't aware if authorities are legally liable to compensate the wrongly accused innocent financially.

When the penalty for a crime is life imprisonment, the accused has nothing to lose. If the penalty is less, a suspect might confess, stay civil, knowing there is light at the end of tunnel. If the suspect (even innocent) feels the system is rigged or the punishment is inevitable, they may become combative, flee or attack police, escalating the situation into a lynching (the exact thing they aimed to prevent).

>Sacrilege by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or through electronic means or otherwise, which is of such a nature as to "hurt the religious feelings of persons professing the Sikh faith."

Too vague & against freedom of speech, religion & expression. Religious sentiments are subjective. Who decides what falls under this category ? Outright primitive.

My certainty ends here. Uncertain territory begins here. I aint a law aspirant/professional. Hence i took assistance of ai chatbots to understand the technicalities and flesh out my own thoughts, given below. From here on take everything with a pinch of salt and it all could be wrong.

Livelaw article says there is no overlooking authority other than police for decision on arrest, authenticity of accusation. There was one in other similar laws. Chatbots points out that there is always a magistrate that checks the validy of evidence right after 24-48 hrs of arrest. It also said within new amendments, instead of removing neutral state authority completely it just gave them a deadline for not allowing it. If they dont answer within the deadline the case automatically proceeds (which was not the case earlier).
So whether new amendments removed these 2 filters, is unknown to me.

Since the punishments are equivalent of criminal cases, the amendments definitely needed president's approval as criminal cases falls under center's subject.

Moving onto solutions.
If 2 filters are removed there should be that initial filter of magistrate and second filter of neutral body (if not satisfied with state). They are supposed to work under the deadline, preventing the limbo delays.

Reduction of severe punishments. Symmetry of punishments for false accusations. Financial compensation if proven innocent. Punishment for officers if accused is not protected from mob violence. Treating mob lynching and incitement to violence as distinct, primary offences with mandatory, harsher penalties, regardless of whether sacrilege is proven.

Rapid trials and strict compliance of deadlines.

Removal of that vague religious sentiment clause. It's 2026.

"The pain of sacrilege is real and something needed to be done". The topic is a tool for political parties to milk. Heat of moment & blind faithed followers demanded stricter punishments and less of judical involvement at fast pace. So called "Bhagat Singh inspired" party gave them exactly that. A Draconian law under the disguise of justice. Right before the elections. No freakin party & BJP governor dared to oppose it, fearing loss of votes. And people claiming this would be used against Hindus or brought as a ploy against them, just get your propaganda out of here. For genuinely curious see image data above.

Op knows these points are far from perfection but discussions on such topics should not stop. Critical thinking and right to criticise should be the pillars of society.

References
previous post, Amendments, Livelaw criticism
Stats
TOI, Tribune
Sop
Tribune, TOI, Actual Copy
Social commentary
1, 2, 3, 4

Source - TOI

After my previous post, comments and i myself felt that there are some tangential points which should also be covered. So here they are. Disclaimer: This post would not cover "Whether blasphemy (with malice or constructive intent) of any religion be punitive by law." That deserves its own post & discussion.

Sacrilege is a prelevant issue in Punjab and its numbers have been climbing.

>597 Total sacrilege cases registered in Punjab from 2015 till 2026
44 ended in conviction — 7% conviction rate
99 acquittal (not guilty)
83 cancelled during investigation
37 quashed by courts & 102 remain untraced.

"Of the 791 accused identified over the period, the identity of 192 could not be established."
15% and 30% of the accused were "mentally unstable" or of "unsound mind"

Mob lynching & justice
Given such low trust in state machinery & "instant justice" belief of some believers, there have been number of incidents of mob lynching & violence. They have resulted in instant death merely on accusations (some later found untrue), right infront of police. "32 accused died during the pendency of cases." So the demand to fix this (a law / reform) has been there since long time.

Here is a catch.

>70 of 99 acquittals (found not guilty) were due to lack of evidence. Other cases collapsed due to hostile witnesses, non-appearance during trial, compromise between parties, and failure to establish motive.

"In several instances, CCTV footage was not secured in time, crime scenes were not preserved, and forensic corroboration was absent. Some FIRs were also registered under public pressure without sufficient evidentiary basis — cases that could not sustain judicial scrutiny."

So whats the point of strictening punishment when investigatory incompetence is one of issue ? Same day new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for investigation to sacrilege of all holy scriptures were released with aim to address these incompetencies. They upgraded to instructions as per BNS 2023 (could be wrong but it was due already) & amendments specific instructions.

>At the scene of crime, a dual-perimeter cordon, inner for evidence and outer for crowd control, is mandatory. Psychological evaluation of acussed asap. Investigations must be completed within 90 days for offences punishable with seven years or more, and 60 days in other cases. High-resolution photography and videography must precede all evidence collection.

>Digital sacrilege gets its own dedicated chapter. Morphed images, deepfake videos, meme-based desecration, and content amplified across WhatsApp, Telegram and Instagram must be treated as serious offences. Officers must capture URLs, timestamps and device fingerprints before seeking urgent takedown requests from Meta, X and YouTube.

For a layman these sops came after amendments but sops could be announced even without bills. Some (not all) of sops are a result of BNS 2023 guidelines, and should have been upgraded long ago but they didnt. Hence the credit will go to new amendments. Masterstroke.

Now some additional (to my previous post) problems of the bill.
Once accused, suspect could be arrested on day 1 itself. They will stay in jail for at least several months before verdict. Even if they are found innocent, public trial would have happened, livelihood, respect, dignity, family member (optional) & mental health all gone. False accuser roams freely without any consequences. There is no symmetry of punishment for deliberate false accusation, mob provoker/lyncher, misinformants of social media & corrupt investigative officer. After all, the cost of being guilty is life imprisonment. Also I ain't aware if authorities are legally liable to compensate the wrongly accused innocent financially.

When the penalty for a crime is life imprisonment, the accused has nothing to lose. If the penalty is less, a suspect might confess, stay civil, knowing there is light at the end of tunnel. If the suspect (even innocent) feels the system is rigged or the punishment is inevitable, they may become combative, flee or attack police, escalating the situation into a lynching (the exact thing they aimed to prevent).

>Sacrilege by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or through electronic means or otherwise, which is of such a nature as to "hurt the religious feelings of persons professing the Sikh faith."

Too vague & against freedom of speech, religion & expression. Religious sentiments are subjective. Who decides what falls under this category ? Outright primitive.

My certainty ends here. Uncertain territory begins here. I aint a law aspirant/professional. Hence i took assistance of ai chatbots to understand the technicalities and flesh out my own thoughts, given below. From here on take everything with a pinch of salt and it all could be wrong.

Livelaw article says there is no overlooking authority other than police for decision on arrest, authenticity of accusation. There was one in other similar laws. Chatbots points out that there is always a magistrate that checks the validy of evidence right after 24-48 hrs of arrest. It also said within new amendments, instead of removing neutral state authority completely it just gave them a deadline for not allowing it. If they dont answer within the deadline the case automatically proceeds (which was not the case earlier).
So whether new amendments removed these 2 filters, is unknown to me.

Since the punishments are equivalent of criminal cases, the amendments definitely needed president's approval as criminal cases falls under center's subject.

Moving onto solutions.
If 2 filters are removed there should be that initial filter of magistrate and second filter of neutral body (if not satisfied with state). They are supposed to work under the deadline, preventing the limbo delays.

Reduction of severe punishments. Symmetry of punishments for false accusations. Financial compensation if proven innocent. Punishment for officers if accused is not protected from mob violence. Treating mob lynching and incitement to violence as distinct, primary offences with mandatory, harsher penalties, regardless of whether sacrilege is proven.

Rapid trials and strict compliance of deadlines.

Removal of that vague religious sentiment clause. It's 2026.

"The pain of sacrilege is real and something needed to be done". The topic is a tool for political parties to milk. Heat of moment & blind faithed followers demanded stricter punishments and less of judical involvement at fast pace. So called "Bhagat Singh inspired" party gave them exactly that. A Draconian law under the disguise of justice. Right before the elections. No freakin party & BJP governor dared to oppose it, fearing loss of votes. And people claiming this would be used against Hindus or brought as a ploy against them, just get your propaganda out of here. For genuinely curious see image data above.

Op knows these points are far from perfection but discussions on such topics should not stop. Critical thinking and right to criticise should be the pillars of society.

Edit:
References
previous post, Amendments, Livelaw criticism
Stats
TOI, Tribune
Sop
Tribune, TOI, Actual Copy
Social commentary
1, 2, 3, 4

"The Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar (Amendment) Bill, 2026, passed by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha, prescribes a minimum punishment of seven years and a maximum of twenty years of imprisonment — extendable to life — for acts of sacrilege against the Saroop(s) of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. The timing, the content, and the legal architecture of this legislation warrant serious public scrutiny."

[bill passed](https://cms.neva.gov.in/NeVA/PB/FileStructures//Notices/eb3d5e8d-7b1d-44df-91e2-af85f7511b75.pdf)

What is considered sacrilage (beadbi or ਬੇਅਦਬੀ) in the law ?

"any wilful and deliberate act, committed with the intent of desecration by way of **physical** damaging, defacing, burning, tearing or theft of the Saroop(s) of Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib or part thereof,"

Well and good till here.

"or by words, either spoken or written, or by

signs or by visible representations or through electronic means or otherwise, which is of such a nature as to hurt the religious feelings of persons professing the Sikh faith."

What is hurtful and what is not ? How will they decide if the nature was to hurt or just niavity ? Isn't it a threat to freedom of speech ?

This amendment makes the law cognisable, non-bailable and non-compoundable.

Matlab if someone accused you of sacrilage, police can arrest you without a warrant, you wouldn't get bail and even if the complaint and you decide to settle /withdraw the case, you can't. Your only option to be out is proven not guilty or appeal to directly high court or supreme court. So you are helpless even if you are just accused of it.

Punishments:

1.) Direct sacrilege: Minimum 7 years imprisonment, extendable to 20 years, plus fine of ₹2 lakh to ₹10 lakh.

2.) Sacrilege as part of criminal conspiracy to disturb peace or communal harmony (including abetment): Minimum 10 years, extendable to life imprisonment, plus fine of ₹5 lakh to ₹25 lakh.

3.) Attempt to commit sacrilege: Typically 3–5 years imprisonment with fines (₹1–3 lakh, per reports)

This punishable range (5-lifeimprisonment) is equivalent of rape, gang rape, dacoity with murder or a terrorist attack. These would have been still okay if chances of

law being misused were minimal, but it's not. Finding concrete & undisputed evidence for proving the accused guilty is not simple.

Was bringing new law (I know it's amendments but acts as new law) justified ? Were there not already existing laws covering these aspects ?

There are already national level laws. Most prominent being 295A. It has a neutral overlooking body that filters out genuine cases from bogus ones. This new one doesn't even have an overlooking body. It's upto DGP of police to take matters in his own hands. 295A was misused for jameen related cases. New law even makes it easier to be misused. Some person have a land dispute with you. He will accuse of this and you are done.

This law has been passed. Another law including holy scriptures of other religions with same frameworks is in the discussions. Think of freedom of speech or expression ? These are state laws. Think of the misuse.

Personal opinion. The intent is agreeable. But instead of introducing amendments they should have / should work towards improving the existing state machinary, the logistics aspect of existing laws and jurisdiction.

"appointment of experienced special public prosecutors, the conduct of trials on a day-to-day basis, and meaningful accountability for investigating officers who allow cases to collapse."

And the funny thing is, not many of us are aware about it.

And again, no one is saying, not to penealise the perpetuaters but only to prevent its misuse.

References:

[bill passed](https://cms.neva.gov.in/NeVA/PB/FileStructures//Notices/eb3d5e8d-7b1d-44df-91e2-af85f7511b75.pdf)

[bill in discussion](https://prsindia.org/files/bills\_acts/bills\_states/punjab/2025/Bill19of205PB.pdf)

[Carvaka podcast](https://www.youtube.com/live/d71LfqsE6GU?si=MqeXa85R1cWaDYMF) & [livelaw article](https://www.livelaw.in/articles/punjab-anti-sacrilege-amendment-disproportionate-precedent-531779)

[law announcement in assembly](https://youtu.be/FYNKFEYm8ww?si=VKX89JpE4un7qecw).

Note: This post is purely from what the law is and its implications perspective. Not directly related to the holiness of scriptures or the religious aspect of it.

What is considered sacrilage (beadbi or ਬੇਅਦਬੀ) in the law ?

"any wilful and deliberate act, committed with the intent of desecration by way of physical damaging, defacing, burning, tearing or theft of the Saroop(s) of Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib or part thereof," Well and good till here.

"or by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or through electronic means or otherwise, which is of such a nature as to hurt the religious feelings of persons professing the Sikh faith." What is hurtful and what is not ? How will they decide if the nature was to hurt or just niavity ?

This amendment makes the law cognisable, non-bailable and non-compoundable. Matlab if someone accused you of sacrilage, police can arrest you without a warrant, you wouldn't get bail and even if the complaint and you decide to settle /withdraw the case, you can't. Your only option to be out is proven not guilty or appeal to directly high court or supreme court. So you are helpless even if you are just accused of it.

Punishments: 1.) Direct sacrilege: Minimum 7 years imprisonment, extendable to 20 years, plus fine of ₹2 lakh to ₹10 lakh. 2.) Sacrilege as part of criminal conspiracy to disturb peace or communal harmony (including abetment): Minimum 10 years, extendable to life imprisonment, plus fine of ₹5 lakh to ₹25 lakh. 3.) Attempt to commit sacrilege: Typically 3–5 years imprisonment with fines (₹1–3 lakh, per reports)

This punishable range (5-lifeimprisonment) is equivalent of rape, gang rape, dacoity with murder or a terrorist attack. These would have been still okay if chances of law being misused were minimal, but it's not. Finding concrete & undisputed evidence for proving the accused guilty is not simple.

Was bringing new law (I know it's amendments but acts as new law) justified ? Were there not already existing laws covering these aspects ?

There are already national level laws. Most prominent being 295A. It has a neutral overlooking body that filters out genuine cases from bogus ones. This new one doesn't even have an overlooking body. It's upto DGP of police to take matters in his own hands. 295A was misused for jameen related cases. New law even makes it easier to be misused. Some person have a land dispute with you. He will accuse of this and you are done.

This law has been passed. Another law including holy scriptures of other religions with same frameworks is in the discussions. Think of freedom of speech or expression ? These are state laws. Think of the misuse.

Personal opinion. The intent is agreeable. But instead of introducing amendments they should have / should work towards improving the existing state machinary, the logistics aspect of existing laws and jurisdiction.

"appointment of experienced special public prosecutors, the conduct of trials on a day-to-day basis, and meaningful accountability for investigating officers who allow cases to collapse."

And the funny thing is, not many of us are aware about it. And again, no one is saying, not to penealise the perpetuaters but only to prevent its misuse.

References: bill passed

bill in discussion

Carvaka podcast & livelaw article

law announcement in assembly.

Edit: fixed grammer & spacing.