Supreme Court of India
PRITAM DASS MAHANTversusSHIROMANI GURUDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE
- Citation
- 1984 INSC 12
- Decided
- 16 January 1984
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- D A DESAI
Holding
The institution Dera Bhai Bhagtu, being an Udasi establishment with samadhs, idols and lacking the essential Sikh features of Guru Granth Sahib worship and Nishan Sahib, does not meet the criteria of Section 16(2) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act and is not a Sikh Gurdwara.
Summary
Sixty‑five persons claiming to be Sikhs applied to the Punjab Government under Section 7(1) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 to have the Dera Bhai Bhagtu in Ramgarh declared a Sikh Gurdwara. The State Government issued a notification, after which the appellant, Pritam Dass, filed a petition under Sections 8 and 10 asserting that the institution was an Udasi dera, not a Sikh Gurdwara. The Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal and the Punjab & Haryana High Court held that the institution was a Sikh Gurdwara. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined the distinctive features of a Sikh Gurdwara, including the presence of the Guru Granth Sahib, worship practices, Nishan Sahib, and the absence of idols, samadhs, and Udasi affiliations. Evidence showed samadhs of Udasi saint Bhai Bhagtu, idols of Hindu deities, and succession not from Guru to chela, which are inconsistent with Sikh Gurdwara requirements. The Court held that the institution did not satisfy the criteria of Section 16(2) of the Act and reversed the lower courts' findings, declaring Dera Bhai Bhagtu not a Sikh Gurdwara.
Issues considered
- Whether Dera Bhai Bhagtu qualifies as a Sikh Gurdwara under sub‑section (2) of Section 16 of the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925
- Whether the presence of samadhs, idols, Udasi affiliation and non‑Guru‑to‑chela succession precludes the institution from being a Sikh Gurdwara
Legislation cited
- Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925 (as amended by Amendment Act I of 1959)s. 10, s. 16(1), s. 16(2), s. 7(1), s. 7(3), s. 8
Subjects
Sikh Gurdwara ActUdasi sectDera Bhai BhagtuSamadhidol worshipGuru Granth SahibNishan SahibSection 16(2)Special Leave Petition
Judgment
' ..
564
II ,
PRITAM DASS MAHANT
v.. •
• SHI~OMANI GURUDWARA. PRABANDHAK COMMlTTEE
ianua;y 16, 1984
- ' \ .
[D. A, ,DESAI, ·R. B. MISRA AND RANGANATH MISRA; JJ.] ,
' '
'Sikh Gurud~ara Act, 1925, as a1J1e11ded by the A111end111e11t Act I of 1959-
. _)~
·SeCtion 16(2)-WIJ~tfler the institution Dera Bhai Bhagtu wGs ·a Sikh Gu'rudwara?.
Whethef mere recit~tiotz of Guru Granth Sahib withotit anyihing nwre ?-Distin_ctive
ieatures of Sikhism ·and Sikh te111ples-Court's ciuty to racord poSitive findings, in tet111§
OJ SectiOn 16-Appreciution of the evidence of a witness.- -Ti1e fact that he be!Ongs
to~ particll/ar polili~al Party o~· the other does 1101,change .the veracity.a/ his.evidence. """'(
Sixfy five persons claimin~ to be meffibers ~f the 'Sikh community· moved ·a:n
application before the State Gover~ment under Section 7(1) of the Si,kh 'Gurudwara
Act, 1925 to hayea.ieligious institution in yillJ.ge Ramga:rh (also known <is Bbagtuana
of. Faridkot tehsil, 9.eclared to. be a Sikh ·Gurud\vara:. -The State Goverrtment
-nOti.fied the said applicatiori in the Punjab Governillent Gazette in terinS of S~tion·.
7(3) of thi.! Act on 18th October, 1963~ Upon this the appellant made ap application
under Sectioi1s 8 atid 10 of ihe Act clain1ing that the institution was µot·a Sikh Guru- Y-
'dwara but an Udasi ii1stitution· known as Dera Bhai Bhagtu. The applic'ation W?-s :-4.
_r:efet~red tO the Sikh Gtirudwara·tribunal for.adjudication. The petition Was ~esistcd
by the r~sPOndcnt Shiron1ani Gurdwara Prabandhak coOOnittce on thi-cc groUnds:
~· (i) that,the <ip.pelbnt ~as not ~ompetent to move': ~hi:: petition urider section_ 7 or' t~ --I'--.. '
Act as he was not a hereditary offi.Ce-holder, (ii) that the provisions of the Act arc noi · ·. ·
ultravjres the Constitution; ·and (iii) that thi"institution in disput~ was a·· Sikh Guru- ,,,..
dwara. The Tribunal held against the respondCnt arid in favour of the -~ppellant on
Contention(!). Since the second Contention was·not preSsed ·and the thfrd questio)l '
0
·_was the only issue, the Tribunal held-that the institution was a Sikh Gurudwara." ·
F ln·app~al, ths Pu.1jab and Ha:ryana High Court confirnied the Tribunal's findings. :-t
.Hence the appeal by Special Leave of the Court. . · . .,
Allowing_ the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1. Thi religious institution, Dera Bhai Bhagtu is not Sikh Guru-
'dwara. on·
th~ materials on record: the findi~g~ recOrd~d byt he Tribunal as well as
G the High COurt are wholly unsupportable to satisfy the tests indicated in Jaw for
.deternlining.'thc character Of the institution... l5_81D]
1.2. -'The fiindings.of the High· Court clearly shOw that the.four impo.rtant
~
and ~ost relevant.aS_pects of the case as disclosed in. the e~idence were comPlcteli
oyerlooked.Or side-tra~ked.by the "High Court. Th~y are: (i' there a;c Satnadhs . ~
on the premises of the institution; (ii) _there are idols and photos of Hindu _deities;
(iii} Bhai Bhagtu was a Udasi' Saint; and (iv) suCcession was frcim Gurq, to. Chclai
) ' ..
•·
•
'
.- '
PR!TAM DAss'v .• GURUDWARA l'RABANDHAK yOMMlTTEE 565
Th~ petition. filed by _the ~ppella~t .under s.8 of the._ Act contained a clearavcnnent
that the_ institution' had beeri set up.b)r.Bhai Bha£,tu who was a _:Udasi Saint and t4e
presence· of th.rc.c Sainadhs of (1).Bhai .Bhagtu, (2) Baba Para~ Rain Ji; and (3)
Mahant Sahib"Dass·Ji, was also assei·tcd. In the written statement the resPondent,
after' a vag~e denial, had admitted- the institution to have ·been founded by Bhai
Bhagtu. Pritani Dass, the <ipPellant did support his case. OrdinarjlY his evidence
would have been treated a'S interesied as he happens to be. the party b'ut his assertions
; "have be~n _well corroborated."The same is sti:engthei~ed by the ·evidence of all-re!i_~on~ B
dent's witnesses. The eVidence of witnesses cJe<i,rly indicates: (i) that there are at-
least t~o samadhs in the premises. 'of the" institution,....one being of. Bhai Bhagtu and
the other.of hi.s moth¢r; (ii) the. existence of the "idol ·or Baba Srichan~, the founder
of the U<lasi Sect in the pre1biscs. ·clearly the Sikhs'\VOuld ·notpepnit the idol of
Baba Srichand in a· Gurudwa~a, while Udasis would oi:"dinarily install such an idol
to perp~tuate the ~neil1ory of the founder ·of ~heir sect; (ifi) the sucession .was from
Guru to Chela; aUd (iv) there are photos of Hindu deities in. the institution. These
.
' faCtS without an.Ything n1ore .wOuld be sufficient to reject the ·case bf the respondent
. ·.
that the institutiOn is a Sikh GufudwaFa. [579A-C; G; 580G-HJ
. . ·
/· . 1.4. Fron1 the verY fact thilt-Guru Granth sahib was fecited in ~he in~titution
'i1ci support can b~ drawn for the claim that·. the institution ~as a· Sikh Gurudwara.
lt is w.~il established that Udasis are midway b"etween Sikhs on*-the ·.one band ilnd.
t!1e 1-lindus on the other. Srichand son of Guru Nan·ak; the founder of Sikhism,
D
.
'had_ broken awa.Y and set .up .
. the Ud~si sect. [581 B-C].
' . .. ,
. · 2: I. Although. for the -purpose of historical rcseafch and analysis on the
subject like Sikhs arid Sikh tcrriPies., the for~rn of a coitrt of Iii.w is not ideal,· yet, if
the. statute enjoins
.
the coutt
'
to decide
t
such
-
questions
' '
tfie court has
.
gdt to
.
dischar£c.
the responsibility. [569D]. · . . . · · ·. · ·- ·
2.2. The court• has· been called upon to decide whether the institution ill . E
ciuestion is a s.ikQ,, G:un.id wara:- While conSidcring this qu.estion ·the Court has to
take into consideration all the cir.cu111stanceS. which favour or milita.te against the
inStiWtion being.·a Sikh Gurudwara . .In the vCry nature of thi~gs and ii1 view ~f the
requirenients of Sub-s.(2) of s. 16 it become.s necessary to conSider whether the in-
Stiiution_ being in charge of an udasi ·saint, the e~isten& of samadhs. ~f Uda:;i saint~
and ,W.orsh.ip thereof, o' the exist~nce ·of the id6ls and absence of a gr.lnthi<lnd sUcce~
sion t6 the ii:istitution from guru t6 chela_ are all relevant considc'rations and the F
Court has. to_ consider them if there. is evidenCe on th~ record. In the "instant. case.
evidence h<is been ad_duced on behalf of the appellant abollt .the existence of sanH'l;(:lhs:
and th;;: Various idols, the' ab_sence oi a granthi and succession to the.institution fion1
guru to chela.· The appellant cannot, therefore, be prevented from urging the afore-
said circumstance~. (573F-H.; 574A] ·
2.3.' Courts Ca.nnot discard "the ev.idc'iice Of ~itn~sses. or" one side by s.in1ply G
• saying thaf the oial testirnony is interested and 'hardly ally credible, -when witnesses
on either side have come to depose on o.lth. Here, the grounds on Which the evidence.
addllced on behalf of the appeftant bas been discarded· may equa'.Ily ap~ly to the
evidence a~duced On behalf of _the respondent. ··rhe Court should. h<ive considered
the worth of"the evidenCe of each witness .and should have given reasons for· dis be-
. lieving the same on _merit.: A bald observati6ll that the Witri~sses producid on behalf
fo the _appe~!ailJ _are· interested must oe deprecated:. The courts h~d to decide t~e
•
, .
'" ....
556 SUPREME COURT RE.PORTS (198~) 2 o.C.R.
question in,_view of .the provisions of sub-s.(2) of s'.16 of the_Act and they had to
·reJOrd a Positive finding in·the light of sub-s.(2) of s.16. Unless the ~14itn falls within
one or the other of the catcgoi·ies enumei;ated in stib-scction(2) of s.16, the insti(utioi;
cannot·b.:: i:le~Jal:-ed to be-a ~ikh Gu_r~dwara [577B-D; 578CJ · . ·
· 3.l. 0.1J. of thi 11iJ3t, r.i;citllting ·asp~cts of Sikhisn1 fa the pro:.:.css which
bcg<1.n with h:.i-.lll'l G..1iu~,··contl.'luo!d durin~ th; pcrjOd of duality iti which ·thefe .
B '.Were· hun1:ttl Gun;ts and a collection of'sacred wrlti~1gs :and ended \Vith the prCsnel ""
situation ln· which fl:lil' authority is c~jo'incd _by-the sCl·ipture. Jn. every rt:spcct the
scripture is what the a·urus ~ \Vor~. [569GJ ·
'. ' .
. . \ .. .
, . ·aoth the Gur~1s ~t~(J the Book deserv~ i"espectt \Vhich they are accorded· because
of the Ban~ \Vhich 'they ~xpress, 'the~ord of divine truth." Therefore, it was possible
fur Guru Adan, the fifth-in the hi1man line, to bow before the colli::ction ~vhich. he
had cotnpiled a~d .inst.ailed in the. newly.· built Darbar Sail.ib in jG04 for he was a·c.k-
c n.owledged the higher authority of the· B:lni due 10 the'pec:sonal i111portance and
"significance' 'v\lich ·he possessed as GUru .. [5691-l; · 570AJ
. . I
. .l'he. Sikh o·Lirus have n1u~h }h co•.(nmon.W.iih ~th~r preCeptors ip indian .. tradi-
tion.but .their history and contribution is. distinctive. They~\verc 'not Bhihntins,
they did not se·~ their caliing to be that of expounding VCdas~ they taught in vCrna~
cu!a( n.it S;.nskrit ;1nd their n1essage was ·for everyone. Th.ey Were "ten in nutnber
D e'ach re_;naining f'ait,hfui to the teachingS of Gui·u Nanak, the firSt Gufu arld when.
lhcir line wis c;1ded· by a conscious.··ctecision of ·Guri'.1 Gobind Singh, the1ast Guru,
suC·~ession was ii1vesfod in a collCction of teachings .which' was given the title of Guru
..
Gra!Hh Sahi6.This i~ now the G.uru Of- the Sikhs. [570B-C]
·' <;An iiripoi:ta1\t CharaCteristic of the teachings of the Siich Guius is thefr ciuphasis
up~n the message, the Ba1;L 1t is this st1:es·s· .\\1hich rri<i..dc possible". the transfer o1
E GurushiP to the s~ripture. The human Gurus .\~cr1: the iristru1nents thrOugl1 whc1i1
tlic,voice of the God be~a1ne· audiblci. [57QDJ~
' .
·The holiest book of th~
',
Sikhs ;s
.
G~~U
.
Grin th Sahib co111Pi!cd b; the Fifth
..
~;stCi·,.
Guru.Ai:ia.11. 1t· is t.he Bible of Siklis. After giving, his followi:rS a central pl~cc OJ ·
worship, Hari-Ma:ndir, he wanted to give thein a· holy 'book. So he collected the
.
(
F h~lnnS of the first four' Gurus and to "these he added his o~n. ,Now this Sri Guru
G~anth Sahib is a living G~·ru· of the Sikhs .. Guru mealls the gilid,c. Gur Granth
'
·. Slhib giYes .Jight and sho\VS the' path to. the suffering hun1anity. Wherever a believer
he
in' Sikhism fa.in troub!~ OT is depressed reads hyrii."ns from the Granth. WhenCver
the Sikhs needed· guidarice or couns(;il, they. should assemble before ·the d-ranth
in all siricerity a~d decide their future line of action ·in the light of teachings o.f tjlc
M~stcr, as' embodied ill the ci-ranth-. The noble ideas e1nbodi.cd in .the Granth would
iiv~ fot ever arid sho~ ve0plc .the path tO bfisss and-happiness. [570E-F; 571B]
G
· • 3.2. , Teinples ~re found almost in every reiigion but there .arc.'so1nc ilifferenc¢s
bctwcen,,thc .Sikh ·ten1p1cs; and . those Of other religlons. ·The. Sikh Qurudwaras have
the follo\ving distinctive 'features: f57JCJ , · ,
.f .'
H L ,Sikh. teinples ire n~r the place of idol worship a.s the H:inqu temples.are.
, . Ther~ is no, place for idol wOrship in a Gurudwara. The ~ntral object of worShiP
'.
'
. '
· PRIIAM oAss.v GURUbw/,.RA,PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE .567'
in a GurudWar<i fa Stj Gur~ Granth Sakib; the hol.Y book. The pattern of wo-rShiP A.
consist& of two 'main iteins: reading of the .holy hymns- follOwed bY their cxplaiiation
by sorri~ learned n1oi.n; not necessa'rily ·a partiCular Grµ~thi .and thell singing of sOmC
r..i.ssages fron1· the Holy Gra1itJJ.. The. fOr'ni.er is called Katha and the seco_nd is caJl~d
l<irtau.-- A Sikh thus .\vorship_s the 1-IoIY- Words that.are :Written in the Granth Sahib,
. the· word.S or ·shabada ·about ihe Etcrllal. Truth Or God.-No id'ol or painting of ·any
Guru can be ·.;,,,orshippcd. [571C·D] · ·, •
2: Sikh warship· iii. tHc Gurudwara i_s a co~'rcgatiO.na:.l worship, whereas~
B
-Hilldu t~niples an/meant for indivi<lLial worship,,.A ~ikh:does the individual \vors!UP 'r-
at ho1ne when· hC recites- Gu:rbani daiiy. So~ scriptu.fes meant for this· purpo~e ·are
. Japji; Jaap, Rcliras,' Kirtan So.hila.: Sa!1gat is the collectitc body of Sikhs ·who_ meet
every day in . the .Gurudwara. {571E-F] · . .' · ' · ·· ' ·. : · ·
. ·, . " ' .
' 3. • Gurudwai:a is· .a plaCe WhCre a cOpy of GutU Gr'anth Sa'l;,ib is inStalled.
·, • · The· Unique. and distinguishillg fe~ture wo~ld ·always be the Nishan Sahib, a fiagst~ff ,.
c.
With a. yellow fla8; of .Sikhism flying. from it. This s~rvCs as a ~yn1boi of. the Sikh •
'pres~nce. It enables the travellers, whether th6y. be Sikhs or not, to know where hOspi-
tality is aviilabie. There· rriay be. conip1exity Or rooms.· in a Gurudwara for the bail- ·
ding may also. Se_rve <;lS 'a school,or, where children are taught the rudi.ments. o'r SikhisI_U .·
.•.:a~ well as.a rest ·centte for travellers. Often there Will be a kitchen where food ~~n.
-~ be prepared though_ langar itself might take place in the yawning. ~ome~es the
Gurudwara will also be. usecfas a clinic. But its·pivotal point is tho place of worship D•
and .ihe .111a'in roo1n ~ilf be that in Which· ihe· Guru Granth Sahib .is installed where
- the comrrfunity g:a;thers for "diwan: Th~ focal p~in,t_i°q thisroom...Will be the bo~k itst:lf·
, ' [571j3·H; 572A]
3.3.. The sine qua. nJ11: for an· i~Stitutio'n ·being a ·Sikh Gurudwara is that ihere
should be esta.blishcid GLfru Granth Sahib and tl,le· w.orship of the same by the con••
.gregatioll." aild a Nishan· Sahib aS·_indicated in the earlier part of the· Judgment. .. ~ · E,
There may be other rooms of the. institution nleant fOr oth"er purposes ·but the crucial
·_test is the existence of Guru ·.Granih Sahib and the worship_.thereof·by the Congrega- ·
tion ~nd Nish<i.n.Sahib. It is'nOfncce~saty that.there ~lust bea.gra"nthi in a Ourud- .
.
:.wara. ·Any learned
.
gation; .[572B·C]
. Guru Granth Sahib and explain· to the. cong[e- · ·
person,can,read '
. . > ... ~ . ,'II·
Hem Silwfi
. . and ,. .
Others v. Basant Das & '
Anr..
(1935,36)
. .
L.R.
,.
631 rA 180;
'
F
-Baw,a lshar Dass'& Others v. l)r. M~han Singh.and Others, AIR 19"39 Lah .. 2~9
.,,~Arjan $1i1gh v. Inder . DaJ:. 15 Lah. 4,47; · · •
'Harnani Sir!'ih v.;,Gurdial-· Singh _[1967] ,2 SCR:·7_39.. .,
.. ,, ' ' . . . .. '
Mahai11 Dharq.on [Jas e(c. v._ State of Pimjab & Ors. [l.9751 3. SCR 160.
.
.. Solum Das v, ·Bela Singh & Ors. AIR 1934 Lab .. ISO . referred .fo•
G
C1v1L APPELLATE Jii.R1SoICTioN : Civil Appeal No. 1983_of 1970·
. . . ., ' ~ .
Fro.m Judgment and Decr~e dated 29-7·69 of the "Purijab & H
• Haryana';Eligh C~urt in F.A.O, No. ·35/66. · :. · ,, ·. .
. .
• '
,
'
,
' '
568 SUPREME COURT REPORTS · [1984] 2.s.c. R.
A ,Naimit L~l, K. V{1sdev and .Mv. V. Gr()verfor the appellant.
V.M. Phadke and Harl>ans Singh for the responde1it.
' '
The Judgment of the court was deiivered ·by
• I •• • •
, B · MtSRA, J. The _present appeal by special leave is 'directed ag~inst
of the High Court of
' , .
the Judgment and~ord6r dated_ 29th July, ,1969
Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
.
·
The dispute in this appeal- centres ·around a . religious institu- . : _.,·._
.. t
tion in village;Ramgarh {also kn9wn. a Bhagtua~a), tehsil Faridkot,
district Bhatinda. This village was previously. in the erstwhile Nabha •
State· which merged with Pepsu and after the reorganisation . of the
If
;:
States, became a part of the Punjab State in 1956. Sixty-(ive persons
cfaiming to be members of the Sikh, community moved ai1 application.
before the· State Government under .s. 7 (!) of the Sikh Gurdwara Act._ "f
1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), .as ameiidecj by the Amend-·
D ment Act I of 1959, to have the institution deelared to be a Sikh Gurd-
wara. The State Goyernment notified the said applic'ation in the
Punjab Gazette in l>rms of s. 7 (3) of the Act.on 18th 6ctober, 1963.
Upon th1s the appellant, made, al1 app'lication under SS. 8 and 10 of
. the Act claiming .that the institution was not a Sikh Gurdwara but an
· Udasi institution known as Dera Bhai B iagtu: This. application was ...4,
E
referred by the State Government to the Sikh Gurdwara Tribunal for.
adjudication. It was ,cbntended by the appellant that throughout
its kng history the institution has been an·. Udasi institution. This ~"
institution ·was not established for use by Sikhs for pub.lie worship. · .•
not was it founded in the memory ofa Sikh Martyr, saint or a·histori-
cal person. It has never been used for public worship by the Sikhs. ·
F
The institution wast he Dera of Udasi Bhekh and t!J,e objects of worship · i' _
· are idols of Gola ~ahib and of Baba Sricharid, and the various sama<!hs.
,,
The petition was resisted by'the respondent Shiromani Gurdwara'
. Prabandhak _Committee- on three' grounds: (l) that the app.ellant was
G . not competent to move the petition under s.7 of the Act because he
. was riot a heredita~y office holder, (2) that the .provisions of the Act
are not ~lira vires the Constitution, and (3) that the institution in dispute,
.
was a Sikh
.
Gur~wara.
i
•· .. , ' -.
: . · · · ~
' ' '
H - ' On the pleadings _of tli.e parties the Tribunai framed three· issnes": •.
(1) w!JFther the provisions of t~e Act are ultra: vires the Constitution,
•
:
. '
,,
'·.· ,' . ·~ .· · · .. ' .
PRL'fAM DA~S ·,., GURUDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMITTEE (Misra,J.) 569
(2) whetherth~ appellant iyas·~ hereditary office holde~. and(3) whet- A
her the institution in dispute was a Sikh Guradwara. Issue No. 1 ·was
notpressed and, therefore, the Tribunal in. conformity with. the previo-
us decisions held the Pf<;>visions ·of th~ Act. to bf intra vires the.Consti-
tution. On the second issue the Tribunal· r<icorded a· finding in favour
of the appellant. On the third issue, the Tribunal ·held that the disp-
uted institution was a Sikh Gurdwara.' · 'B .
. The.app~Uant feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the· Tribunal
tooh up•ti,e matter in appeal to the High Court and the High Conrt
··\.' in its turn confirmed the findings of the Trbunal and dismisse.d the
· . atppeal by the impugned judgment.. The appellant. has now comt; to
. his Court on obtaining -special leave and the only issue that' survives
for consideratfon by this Court is issue No.3 , that is; whether the
.c
: institution .in dispute is Sikh Gurdw~ra. a .
•
. Bef~re .'dealing with the poin\s urged by the counsel forthe par-
ties i.t woulli be appropriate at this stage to know tlie distinctive features.
of Sikhism and Sikh temples. Althongh-for the purpose of historical D
research and analysison such subject, the forum of a court of la.w is
. not ideal yet if the statute enjoins the. Court to deci.de such c)uestions, .
·.the Cour.t has .got to discharge the respons1bility. Section 16 (1) of •
· the. Act. provides: . · ·
"16 (!), NDtwithstandiiig anything contained in any .E
other law in force if in . any .proceeding before a tribunal it is .
... ,disputed that a gurdwara should or should not be declared to
be a Sikh Gurdwara, the tribunal shall, before.enquiring into any
other matter in dispute. relating to the ·said gurdwara, de.cide
whether it should or
should not be declared a Sikh· Gurdwara in.
accordance with the provisions of sub-section· (2)." . F .
..
;: . . '
One of the most fascinating aspe~ts of Sikhism is the process which,
' began With human Gurus, continued during the period of duality in
which there. were human Gurus and a collection of sacred ;vritings ·
and ended with the present situation in which full autliority is 'enjoined·
by the scripture. In. every respect the scripture is what the Gurus ;vere.
.
··
.. '
. ,_ . .
- -
Both the. Gurus. and the Book deserve respect, which they are
.
-
. .
~ . .
. ;
.. .
. . -
: aceorded ·becau.se of the Bani which they express, the word of divine
·truth: Therefore; it was possible for Guru Arjan'; the fifth in 'the human
H
•
line to bow before the collection which he had compiled and installed
, • • '' • < • ' • - • -· '
. .
~
. 570 SUPREME COURT REPORTS "(1984] 2 S.C.R
.{ .. ' . . '
in' the<imvly bui.lt Darbar Sahib in 1604 for ,he was acknowledged the
A
highe,· au\hoi·ity ·of· tho Bliliduo to the p'Tsonal 'importance and
··significance which he. possessed as Gur~ .
. '
The 'Sikh Gurus have much in con\mon \Vith. other preceptors
in Inqian- traditio.n but their h~tory and contribution is distinctive,
·n They were. not Brahmins, they cl.id not sc;e .their calling lo be that of
· expoi111~.i!1g Vedas, they taught in vernacular not Sanskrit and their
message was for everyone: ·They" were .ten in number each remaining .
faithful to the· teachings of Guru Nanak, the first Guru and \\'hen their·
line \yas c1;ded, tiy. a conscious decision ·of Guru Gobind Singh, the last
Guru, successi~n· was· invested in a co!lectfon of teachings which was·
c
Sikhs..
.
given 'the :title ·of Guru Gra'nth Sahib.
' '
'
This .1s is no;.v .the Guru of the
• , An important characteristic of ·the teachings of the .Sikh Gurus .
is th~ir emphasis upon .the .message, the Bani. It is tliis stress which
ma.de po·ssible the transfer of Guruship to the scriptur.e. The human
D· ·Gurus were the instruinenis through whom the voice of God became
audible_, . ' r • • . • • . . • •.
The holie~t book' of tl;e Sikhs is Guru Gra;1th Sahib compiled
by the Fifth Ma~ter, Guru Arjan. It is the Bible of Sikhs. After givillg
·his 1follo\Vers a central place of worship, Hari-mandir, he wanted to
E i:;ive- them a holy bo.ok. So he collected the hymns of the first four
· Gurus" and to these he addCd his own: Now this. Sri Guru Granth,
Sahib is a living Guru of.the ..Sikhs. Guru means the guide. Guru'
. Graqth Sahib gives light and shows the ·path to.the suffering humanity.
, Whetever·a believer in"-Sikhism is in trouble or is depressed he r~ads
...
~)'.]llll~ from the Granth. ·· · · · ..
-
When Guru Gobind Singh felt "that his worldly sojeurn· was ..
near, he niade the fact known to his disciples. The disciple~ asked
him as. to who. would be t.heir Guru in future; The Guru immediately '
· placed five pies and a coconut b.efore the holy Granth, bowed his head
~e.fore it and said:-· ' · , ·
·. : '~The Eternai Father willed, and I raised the Panth. . • .
All ipY Sikhs are ordained to believe the Grant? is their preceptor. ·
!fuve faith in the-holy Grailth as yolir .Master andco nsider it~
lhe visible manifestation. of the. Gurus.·
He who hath a pl!re heart will seek guidance from its holy W?rds".
•
•
PRITAM nAss v. dUJiDWARA i>RABANDHAK COMMITEE(Misra,·J.) 571 ·'
- .. ~- ' ~ .. . . . . '.. ·. . ..
'• . . ""'
. The Guru repeated th~se ~ords and told the di;ciples. not to A
·_;), . grieve at his departure. H ."was true thaHhey wculd. not see, hi~ body
· .in its physical manifestation but .he wJuld be ever present among the
Khalsas. Whenever the: Sikhs needed.giiidance or. counsel, tney should ·
· assemble liefore the Gr.anth in all sincerity and dec{de their future line
of ~ction in tho light of teachi;1gs ·or the Master, as embodied in the
Granth, Tho noble ideas emboc(ied i.~ th~ Granth would:live for ever B
..
· artd show people the ·pati, to bliss and happiness.
.
'
. Temple.s are fou.nd almost incv~rv teligion but there. are s;me
differences between the Sikh temples and th6se of other religions. The
· Sikh Gurdwar~s have the foll(iwing distinctive .features:
.. ~
c
'i. , Sikh temples are n:it the place of id0l worship as the Hindu
.temples are. There is no place for idol. worship 'in a Gurdwm:a. The
.central object of worship in a Gurdwara is·Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the .,
holy. book. TJ"te paitern ofwJrship con~ists of two main items: reading
.•
· of. the
.
holy hymns followed
. .
by their explanation by some learned
.
man, ·
not necessarily a particular Granthi and .then singing of some passage~
D
from the· Holy Granth.' Th; forme"r is called Katha .and the ·second· ·
., is;cal)ed Ki\·tan. A Sikh thus worships the Hofy Words th~tpre wrilfon ·'
·in the.Granth SJhib, the Words· or Shabada about the Eternal Truth
·.or God: No idol or painting of any Gu;u ca1.1 be worshippecl.. .
E
2..~ Sikh worship.in the Gurd;,,ara is a congregational worship,
" \.. .• whereas Hindu temples arc meant for individual worship .. A Sikh ~.oes
''. ., -, ·the indivic.ual.worship at home when he r~citcs Gurbani daily: Some ·
scriptures meantfor,this purpose are Japji, Jaap, Rehras.. Kirtan·Sohila.
Sangat
'
Is tl1e·collectivc
. body
'
of-Sikhs
-
who meet every
' .
day in the. Gurd•
wara .. .\ F
. ·,\·
. , 3.. Gurdwara is a place where a copy of' Guru-Granth Sahib is
/,
installed. The unique'and distinguishing f~ature would always. be. the
"Nishail Sahib, a flag~taff with a yellow flag of Sikhism flyin'g from it.
This· serves a:l'a symbol of.th~ Sikh presence. It enables the travellers,_
whether they be Sikhs ~r n~t, to kno·w where hospitality is .a~ailable.
·· There may be complexity of rooms in a.Gurdwara for the. building ..
rti.~yalso·serve as' a schooi, or where children are taughi the .. rudiments
of Sikhism as welhis a· rest centre for travellers. Often •ihere will be
·. a )dtehen where food can'be.prep3red though Jnngar itself might ti.kc
place iii the yawning. So.metimes tlie ·Gurdwara ·will also· be used as
a.clinic, But its pivotal point is the place of worship.and
. the main room ..
'
. - ~ .
..
572 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ll984J. 2
.
~ • S.C.R
A will be tl{at in ~hich the Guru Granth Sahib is installed where the
.· · communiiy gathers. for ·diwar!.: _The. focaf poi.nt in this room will .be
· the book itself. · ·
From the foregoing discussion it is· evident that the sine qua non
for an' institution befog a Sikh Gutdwara is that there spould be esta-
B blished Guru Granth Sahib and the worship;of the same. by the con-
gregation, and a Nishan Sahib as indicated in the. earlier part of the
judgment:'There may be .other rooms of the institution meant. for .
. other purposes but the crucial test is the existence o.f Guru Granth
Sahi.b and the worship therebf by the congregation and Nishan Sahib.
It is not nc~ssary th.at there must be a granthi in a Gurdwara. Any
c learned person can read Guru Granth Sahib and explain to the-congre-
gation.
With this · preliminary about the distinctive features of a Sikh
_temple we proceed to deal with the ·contentions of the counsel for the
parties. ·. ·
D. •
' Shri Nlunit Lal, counsel for the appellant contend.ed that the
High. Court has misread the evidence and that'has ~itiated its finding.
He referred to the material porticns .o(the judgment and ,the evidence·
of the parties to support. his contention. On perµsal of. the judgment.·
and the r~Jevant evidence we do not find· any misreading of evidence
: E by the IJ:igh Court: This contention, therefore, has no .force. We,
however, nnd that the High Court proceeded on the assumption that. • . _j' .
adniittedly Bhai Bhagtu was a Sikh ·saint ana that the disputed institu-. .r-.....r
'
"·
tion was established in his memory. This would be evident from' the ,...
f9llwing ·observation made by he High .Court.
l .
F /,
"On an overall coilsideration of this aspect we are· ina,
clined to• accept the contention cf Mr. Shan!· that admittedly
Bhai.Bagt_u was a Sikh saint and this. institution was' established
in !~is memory arid as such the case of the· respondent ·w·auld •
als~, come within the amblf of s. 16 (2) (iv) of the• Sikl1 · Gun\- .
G . dwrira Act". · , • "' '
But this observatibn is not warranted from the pleadings or the
the evidence of the parties. Pritam Dass, the appellant, as P.W.S, in
his deposi\ion has categorically stated: ''Bhai Bhagtu was an- Uda.si
.H Fahir" . .In the pleasdings also .the appellant set up that Bhai 1\hagtu ·
was·.an·
.
Udasi
i
saint. and
..
the in.stitution
.
was a Dera
. . . -' .
.
of the Udasi sect,
.
,
•'
.
PR!TAMDASS.V; GURUDWARA PRABANHDAK COMMITTEE (Mi<ra,J.) 573
.
~
. '
..
.. . .· '. . .
while the respondent, on the. other hand, in its reply sta!e<l that Bhai
Bhagtu was a Sikh ~aint and. the institution was established In the
momory of that Sikh saint. In
this state of pleadings and the evidence ,
· adduced by the. parties.it will not be corr,eGt to say that ·admittedly
a
Bhai Bhagtu was Sikhsaint and that this institution was established in
his memory. R~the~ this was the only disputed question to bfi decided
· bv the Court. Thus while holding, that there is no misreading of evi- B
dence we find that. there is misreacjing of the pleadin¥s of the parties.
It was next co~tended for the appellaf\t that ihe appellant 6f ud-
asi set being incharge of the institution in question, the succession to
the institution being from Guru to Che la, the institution. being recor
ded as Dera of Udasf'sect in s~me of the revenue· reco~ds, the existence c
and worship of 'vario.us fdJ'ls.and sainadhs within the .precincts,of
the institution· and the absence of a: granthi in the institution are
all ip.-compatihle wi.th the institution being a Sikh Guidwara.
• .. '
.Shri M:. N. Phadke appe~ring for. the respondent ~n th.e other
D
harid has contended that'(!) the· points which were never urged in the
courts below could not'.be allowed t0 be raised for the first time in
this c;;ourt; (2) in a11y 'case the existenoe ofsaniadhs ai;cl. idols within
· the precinots of the institution and th·l worship thereof, and the absence.
of a granthi and the ;uccession to the institution from guru to chela
are not destructiv;'·of the institution being a Sikh Gurdwara; (3) the
finding of the H.igh Co.urt that the institutiofl in question is a ~il<h
Qurdwara is fully warranted by.the .evidence on record, and (4) the
nature of the institution has to be decided·i'n•the light of sub-s.: (2) of
..... s. 16 of the Sikh Gurdwara Act. · ·
. '•
The Co.urt has been c~lled upon to. decide whether t~e institution F
in question is a Sikh Gurdwara. While. considering this question the
v. Court has to take into consideration all the circumsta~ces which fav-
our or militate against the institution ~ing a Sikh Gurdwara. In the
v;ry nature of things arid in view of the requirements of sub-s. (2) of
s. 16 it blcomes necessary to consider whether the institution being
in charge of an Uadasi saint, the existence of samadhs o(Udasi saints .G
at\d worship:thereof, or the existence- 'of the' iclbls and. absen~e of a'
granthi and succession to the institution from guru to chela itre all·
rnlevant consideratio,ns anil the ·court has to consid" them ifthere is
evi<;lence on the record. rri the instant case evi~.ence has been·adduc~d
on behalf of the appealla.,nt ab~ut the existe~ce of samadhs and the H
various idols, the absence of a granthi and suc9ession to the i.nstitution
. .. . . . - . ~
' '
(,
574 : SUPREME COURT REPORTS. [lcJ~4l 2 s.c.~.
A· · from guru to chela. We see no reason why the appeallant be prevented·
•. · froni'. -urging the· aforesad c!rcumstances, · ' ~
Ch tho quostion . whether the existence· of samadhs and of #the .
a - .
idols and the absence of granthi or succession to the institutioil from
a
'gunl'to chela militates ag~inst the institution ·being Sikh Gunl.wara
B the counsel for the parties have ~dduced evidenc.e iii support .of .tl~eir
respective contentions. The counsel for. the parties have also cited
cases in- support of. their re.specti~e conteritio~s. .·. ·
'
•;•
" ..The coun~el for the appella~t· relied' on' Hem Si;1gh & Ors. v.
.
. JJa.<ant Das & Anr<ll, In ·that case the qu~stion for consideratoin was .
c whether Udasis are Sikhs. The courfhcld that Udasis are·no't Sikhs for -~
the purpose~ of .Sikh Gurdwara Act. Although Guru Nanak founded
a
Sikhism as ·new religion by sweeping awaf idofatry and polytheism,
· Sri Chand; "the son of Guru Naiiak the founder of the Udasis, was
· hhnself not a Sikh but a Hindu. No rcconciliatlpn bet\Veen the Sikhs
· and the U<hsis ever took place. The Udasis are in· ·consequence not
D Sikhs,· hut. schismatics who separated in. the earliest days of Sikhi.si.n
and never morged with the foliowors of the .Gurus. .. ,
' . .
, Reliance was next placed· upon Bawa lshar Dass & Ors. v: Dr.
· Mohan Singh & .Ors<" ·The.. Court h.eld·: ·
E . '""it. has' been established that the ·.Mahants·- have ·all
along been Udasis, 'that the-institution was an Udasi mon·astery,
that.the Guru Granth Sahib was read there by the UdasiMahant
a~d that Sikhs. may have attendee! thes~ readipgs but that all
other ceremo1)ies; observed by Udasis and Hindus, were per-
formed at the institution, fi cannot be held from the n1ere fact
F that the lJdusis also read the Guru Granth Sahib a book which
. they d 0 venerate, that tho Sikhs.should be associated i-n the mana~ . ..
gemenf of this geritiine.Udosi insfituli0i1. It was held.by a Divi-
sion B'nch of this Court in 15 Lah. 247 101 that the Udasi order
c~nstit~tes a separate sect, ' distinct,from tl\e orthodox Sikhs·
·and that though they -have ·retaiiied many Hindu .beliefs ar.1\
G practices, .yet in the wider sense o.f the term they:may also be .•
·Sikhs'. They occupy an intermediate position between strictly
orthodox Sikhs and .
Hindus. The
' .
Udasis are in fact a monasticr .
(1) [1935-36] L.R. 631 !.A: 180.
H (2) AIR 19j9 Lah. 239. . •
· , (3) Arjan Singh v. lnder Das.
. ..
: " .- .
i :....
. . • ~ . .
.. . . \
PRITAM ~ass v.. GURm{ARA PR~BANDHAK coi.i~mrE~ (Misra, J.) 575•
order in their origin and are folio{Yi:rs of Bawa· Siri :Cfoicl.. son
of t'1e first· Guru. Though· they worship smadhs, etc. they~
d~ reverence .the.Granth Sahib without completely renouncing
Hinduism. They are often in charge of the village Dharamsala l
or GJrdwara, which is .a Sikh institution, but in othe,r cas~s tlie
Sadh and his qhelas constitute a monasetry or. college: Owing·
to their intcrl)lediate position, it is possible for Udasfa t~ be in" B
charge of~ Sikh Gurdwara, properly so callad, but it . c'.oes not
follow that thlt institution is a Sikh Gurdwara and not a
tiusUdasi institution lllerely because the G\~nth· Saliib is r.eap.". ·
'
-
~·
· In Harnain Singh v:.Gurdial Singh''' 01i ari analysi• of various
decisions this Court held:
, I .
c
'°'T;1e;e d'cisio"'. cleariy indicate. the . principlo that ·though
the Sikh. Guru Gr'anth Sahib i_s read 'in the shrines managed b¥ "
the m:mbers :ofih; Ud1si sect, that was not eno~gh to hold V'at
those shrmes were Sikh Gurdwaras. · In the case before-us, the
1nore fa.ct that at some stage there was a Guru Gran'th Sahib i.n ··.D.
tfiis Dera cannot.thus lead to any con~Iusion that'"this institution
Vias ffieant for; ~r belonged -to,.-the roJlowers,. of the Sikh r,e1igion. :·
·Clearly, the Dera was m~iatafoed for. an entirely <1.istin~i sect
b9wn as,the Ni'rn{aia Sadhs who 'cannot be regarded as Sikhs
' and, consequently, in their mere capacity of foll@wers of Sikhs
religion residing in village Jha~,'.awal_a,. the plaintiffa/respcindents E ..
could not be held to have sitch·im interest as could entitlei hem
to institute the suit t!nder s. 92 of the Cod• of Civil Procedure."_·
.
· . Shr.i P1adke appearingfo,"the re•j1o~dent.·o~
. the 'other hand
h 1~ citd.M,.,fiant Dharam Das etc. v. State of Pun/ab & Grs.'2> ..
F.
.D,aling with the tenets of the Sikhs this Court observed:
.··:r' I
\.
· · "Ti1e Sikhs believe in the ten Gurus.:__the last of whom was
'· 'Guru Gobind Singh. They further believe 'that there is no otl;cr,
Guru after Guru Gobind Singh ;.vho enjO{led on his followers
that a·fter him they should consider Guru Granth Sahib as tho
Guru. They .do not s~bscribe to idol worship and polyt~eism,
·nor do they hav' any Samadhi in their shrines. The teaching pf
Sikhs was against· asceticism.' They believe ih Guru Granth
'Sohib., which is a Rosary of sacred poems, exhortations; etc.
(l) r1961(2 s,c.R. 739.
H
(2) (1975) 3 s.c;.R. 160..
•
.•'
- . . I . ,. ' '
·•
576
. '
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1984] 2 s.c.R.
~:
A Duing :th~ time of
the Sikh Gurus the Gurdwaras were under
their d\rect supervision ·and conirol or. under their Masends or•
·' ·missionary agents. After the death 6f Guru Gobind Singh the
, .Panth ls re'cognised as the the corporate representative or'the
· Guru o)l earth and thereafter they were managed by the Panth
through their Granthis and other sewadars who were under
B direct 'S'upervision of the locai Sa·ng~t or congregation.-' ·The
posi!ion of the Gurdwaras changed during' British
~: ·~. .-
regime. The '_"
mahants who were in charge pf the Sikh Gurdwaras could either
be a S\kh Mahan! or.,Udasi Mahan! .... Though there v;as no ·.
reconciliation between the Sikhs and Udasis, it did not matter
if the M1hant ofa Sikh Gurdw~ra was not a Sikh Mahan! because· •. ,
;_J"
''c the' PaAtbc.or Sarigat exercised control over the 'Gurdwaras". j
·~
· ·. ' Next
. :
r;liance
,_ ,,
was placed -o Solian
- . It -
,Das
'
v.
., '
JJc/a Singh
'
& ·O~s.M
' . -
Dealing with\s. l6(2ff of the Sikh Gurdwara Act the Court ob~erved:
I ·"(.
' " :·
":Thedocumentary evidenc.e therefore establishes, that the
" . ._,.,..;,.
.D dharams.ala has been a place of public worship since 1853, and
that such worship has been connected with.the Gran th Sahib·· · ·
I' am prepared to accept th evidence of the · objectors that the
'\' . existenc~ of a samadh dates only from recent times, morethan
p~obab!y after t!,1e Sikh Gurdwara controvetsy had beconie
acute a1id he. imp~rtance of a samadh had l:i'een realizec\ by the ·,·:.I..
.lJdasi Mahants, I hold therefore that the· evidence supports
· tile con~lusion of the majority ~f the Tribunal that this institution
, falls withins. 16 (2) (iii) of the Act".
~- ' . .
~ . '
, In view of the divergen! cases cited by the cou'nsel: f,)r the par-
ties we have(jto take into consideration the distindive features of a :
:Sikh Gurdw:{ra .as discussed in ·the :·earlier part of the' judgment., so· ' if
viewed; the 'disknce and worship of Gum Granth Sahib and the exi',
.. stence of Nishan Sahib are the determinative factors. " ·
The Tribunal c!id not take· into consideration the oral evidence
-
adduced
. '
'
by the . parties. Eight witnesses
");' . '
were prcduc<) .· en behalf
of the appellant while six.witnesses were produced on behalf of the
. ',
the respondent'. The High Court also did not give a proper deal to
the oral evide)i~e addt;ced by the appellant.,The only considerati~n
' ....
' .H given by'the 'High-
court to the .oral testimony
~ _,
behalf, of thefappellant was in the following terms:
·of the witnesses
.
. ,,
on ~
(I) AIR 1934 Lilh. 180."
'
'' ~,
• <
.. ,,
.;·.
P'IUTAM DASS v. GURVDWARA PRABANPHAK COMMITTEE (Misra, J.) 577. r
• . '' 1 •
_·,.
.
. "As- regards
'•
'
. . . ( ._' '
. the oral'. testimony .on .the point that the
'
institution was a Dera ot
an Udasi Sadhu, the same is ob~i-
.
•·. ously inte1ested, and hardly credible. The Tribunal has not attac ·
,. ·. '-- -
I'. A '
' ' " -, 'lit '
thed any weight to the ~mi; and we are wholly in agreement .
' . with the finding 'of the ,1)ribunil. on that poi.nt." . . .
··. ;-'\_
· The witnesses, on either side have cgrneto depose on oath. The B
.. &rounds on which the evideqce adduced on behalf of the ··appellant.
~ J has been: discarded mafequally apply to the evide.nce adduced on. be-
' :Jialfof the respondent The Court should have ·considered the worth
of the evide.n~e of each. witne.
-· ..
'"-
-- . \
ss and sh.ould ]lave given reason.s for d. is- .
believing the same on merit. A bald .observation that the' witnesses.
produced on' behalf of the.. appellat are interested must be deprecat\:d. . c
'.;,
. ' ~ . ' ' ; - '
Even otherwise the.co.urts below have no.t approached the case
. from .the correct angle. (The. ~our ts hail to cl.eciile the· question in view.
. efthe pr0visions of mb-s.(2) of s. ·16 of the Act ~nd they had. to recor_d
a p~sitive fitiding in the Iigllt of sub-s. (2) of s. 16,) which reads: ·;.~,.. ·
' .
.
")6 (2) If the tribunal
. .finds that the .gurdwara_,, · ·_ "'·
. -
-
.
'
-
·.. (i} was es\ablished by, ;r i~ memoryof.any of the Ten Sikh.
Gurus,.or in commemoraticil of any incident in the life of _·: ·
·any of the Ten Siklj Gnrus ·and was used for public worship
··.by Sikhs, before and at the 'time of the presentation the of
- : of the
. petition nnder.
'sub-section
. . (I) of section
.. 7 ;'.or '
(ii) owing to some tradition co'rlnectecl' with one of the Ten Sikh .
Gums, was used. for public worship predominantly by Sikhs, • ·
before and at the time of the presentation of the~petition ..
u.nder sub-section•(I) of scctio~ 7; or
' . . . ' \ . .
' (iii) ~as e~tablished·for use by Sikhs for thepu;pos~\f p~blic . \:·' .
worship ·and was us~d· for such worship by Sihks, before· .G.
and at the time of.the presentation' of the petition under .
Sub-section (I) of section 7 ~ qr. - · · ·
(iv) was established in mem~r~· of.a· Sikh martyr,'saint or histori- .·
1
. cal person: and was used for public worship by Sikhs,'before:
and at the time of the pfesent~tion of the petition under ~ H
sub-section (1) of section 7; or ·~ · · .
. \ . "
•
578 SUPRE~JE COUQT REPORTS [198~] . 2 s.c.R.
,,
A (v) owing to some .incident connect"d with the Sikh religion was
, used for public worship predpminantly .my Sikhs, ·before
' a~d at the time ti~ th·e presentation of the petition under
• si1b-section (1) of section 7; .. .
' '
the. tribun·a1 shall decide th.at it shciuld be declared to be a Sikh
B , , Gl\rdwara, and record an <:rc\er accordingly." . .'
Uhles·s the.claim falls within one-or the"other of the catO:go1ies
enumerated in sub-section (2) .of' s: 16, the institution: cannot be .4
declared to be a .Sikh Gurdwara.
c , The Court hacl, therefore, first to ·consider as pleaded by. the
parties, as to whether Bhai Bhagtu was a ·urlasi saint or a Sikh saint, .
and then. to decide on the basis of evidence whether the institµti.on in
question is one or. the other of the types indi~ated'. This was the only.
-
·, question for consideration before the High· Court but. unfortunately "f.·
it assumed, what was to be proved. '
.D '
Oo t!1~ fo1'egoing discussiqn we are satisfled that the Hi;h 'court'
has not given a 15ro]l,er deal to the matter and has not considered the
or,al evidence .add.riced on behalf'of the parties. Nor has it approached
case.form the· cotre.ct perspective of law. .-
• .
E
Ordinarily, iii a situation as here, the matter should have gone.
ba~k. to he High Court for rec.ording · findings on the bai:Sis of
F
appreciation of evidence but, we· are not incl ind to remand the
matter as it is a very old dispute. We .-a're, ih~refore, prepaJed to
take that,,burden o'urselves and finally decide the. dispute.· As would.·
appear, parties were
. -
aware of- the
. nature , of ciaim .and ' the\ tvidence
'
·.to oe led' and, therefore, par.tie~ concentrated their attaention_ on
-
.the aspects ·which would be decisive of. the poiflts in dispute. It is
unfortunate that the Tribunal ·and the High Court " .
did not keep the
proper perspective in view· whils dealing with the matte1.
G . ;O• behalf of the appellant Rain Saran Dass, P W I, Charan
Dass, PW 2, Bishan Dass, PW 3, Jagraj Singh, PW 4, ~hajju :Ram,
-, PW 5, Zora Singh Patwari, PW 6, Surjit Sin1ih. PW 7 and the appel-
·lant; PW. 8, were examined. On. behalf of the respondent, Hardev
Singh, RW I, B1chan Singh, RW 2, Ba!bir Singh, .RW 3, ·Balwant
H '-. ' .
s:
Singh, R W 4, Hazura Singh, R W a11d Gurdial Singh, RW 6, were'
. ~ -
exammed as witnesses.
'.
_:~·
i
•
I ' PRITAM DASS v: GURDWARA PRABANDHAK COMMI:rTEE. (Misra, i.) ~79
• ' < • '
_,,,;,· . . Th_e finding of the High Court as extracted hereinbef9re clea- 'A .
. rly show tilat the four tmpqrtant and most relevant aspects of the "case · ·
as disclosed in the evidence were ·completely ovrlooked or side-track-
ed by the Hlg'1 Court, They are . : (i) there are Samadhs on tiw
·premis·?S _of th·' institution·; (ii) there ate idols and· photos of»Hindu
deities; (iii) Bhai BhagtU was a Udasi Saint; and-(iv) succession was
frdm Gurll so Chcla .. The petition · filecl by the · a·ppellant under , ,. .B
s.8 of the Act co11tained a
clear· averm?nt that the instituiion \lad' '
a
been set ·up by Bhai Bhagtu wl\o was· Udasi Saint and the pre ...
sence of three Samadhs· of (1) Bhai .Biiagtu, (2J Baba Paras Ram Ji
"~ and (3),M»fhant Sahib. Dass ~i, was' also. asserted. In the .wrilteq
statement the' respontlcnt, after a vague denial, had admitted the
in'.titutiOn to have been foundect' by Bhai Bhagtu.. · ' . . C
.
PW I, Rani Saran Dass stated that there 'was an id0l.ofBaba·
'
.
Srichand in. the institution and there were pictures of Lord Krishna'
a1\d oth"r Hincl.u deities. .This '.statement wao elicited in cross-
exaininaticin made by the respondent. PW 2 has. stated that there
is ah idol of Baba. Srichand and. Gola Sahib in ·the institution and 1 D
they are objects of worship. PW 3, Bishart Dass; referred· to the,
·idol of. Baba Srichand. PW 4, Jagial stated that there. were three
or fouc'Sarn»dhs on the premises of . the institution and those are
objects elf \vorship. , There wa~ no challenge to this statement in.
examiaati9a-in-chief by cro'ss~exaniination.. P\Yi 5 ~as _asked iii cross
examination whether there . were Samadhs on the. premises of the E
.-'";;'. . inslituti~:~nd his answ'C is revealing. He stated that there are
- ·-three Sa ·:is on-the premises of· the institution and there is a.
· dome over tl10 Samadh of Bhai Bhagtu. He .added t)lat there are
other pictures of Hindu deities and Hindu festivals are celebrated, in
the instituti9rl. PW 7, Surjit Singh, the local Sarpanch stated that the
'. '1. · institution -.yas of ljdasi Fakirs, He also stated that there· is a: Samadh . F
of\Bhai Bb.agtu on the premises of the institution and it is an 9bject
of worship. He indicated that the Samadh ofBhai Bhagtu was worship-
ped .iil a grand ;cale while the ·other two Samadhs were not
.treated qn equa.l basis. Thete was no cross-examinatio~. o.f this wit•
. ness on this aspect. Pritam Dass, the appellant did support. his case,,
Oridinarily his evidenc~ would have been treated as interested as he G
happens to be the party but his assertions have well ·corroborated .
•
Coming to the respondent's side:· the first witness Hardev Singh
in his examination-in~chief stated tha.t there is a Samacih of Bhai Bhagtu
in the institution and another Samadh of his mother. On the basis of :H
. this ad~ission of the. principal witness of the respondent there can be·
. . . ' I. : ' . ·. I. '
~
. -~-
580
'
'''
, SUPREME COURT.REPORTS
.-- /
·I
'
[1984] 2 ,s.c.!l.
A no ;doubt ' that
. .
Samadhs
. .
e~ist
. -
within·
I
the institutio~. ' At the hearin~.
,_;
\,.., ''
'\ counsel had pointed out that this .witness was a ll).ember of the Commu_-
nits Party. We do not think _that would at all be a proper /V~Y of appre-
ciating the evidence o(the witnesses; He was a witness called by the
respondent and was notl declared hostile, if he made admissions
in his examination-in-chief. On the other hand, the fact that he dots
.B. · not belong to .the groups of either party and is a Communist would
lend credence· to his evidence as coming from· an, impartial source.
,· Thenext_witness; RW 2, Bachan Singh admitt.i'd the existence of the
'Samadhs but denied that the Samadh of Bhai Bhagtu was an obje~t ·
of worsliip. RW 3, Baibir Singh, admitted pie presence of Samadh of _;,.j,:-
B_hai Bha'gtu as also oC:his mother. It.is in the evid<ince.cifthis witn•u ·'\·.
'' that he also belongs to the C:omoiun!st Party. What. we ·h~vo &aid
'
about RW I 'equally. applies. to thls )vitness: RW 4, Balwani
"singh ad~itted the_ presence of Bhai Bhagtu's Samadh; while_ RW S, ·
· Hazura Singh stated that' there were two Samadhs oh the premiwr-,
'·"( '
one of Bhai Bhagtu and the' other of his mother. The last witness,
· RW 6, c;urdia( Singh in his e~idence admitted the existence offue tw"
.D Samadhs--o-of Bhai }lhagtu and liis mother. ' ·
• I • . . • "
This'. analysis of the evidence clearly indicates that it has been ·
unquestioriably established without the' slightest shadow or'a doubt
that there are at least two Samadhs on the premises of the institution- -. . , ~
. one being of-Bhai Bhagtu and the other of his mother; ' .
.. Th~ existence of the idol of Baba Sric~and,
the' rofder o~ the~--~. '
Udasi sect in the premises. also ;eems to bjivebeen fully establisheli. ' •-
. As already stated, Sikhs would not permit the · idol of Baba Srichand '
in a Gurdwara while Udasis would oridinarilyinstall such an idol to
perJ?eluate the memory of the' founder of their sect. '' ' ' --r·
'
What emerges from this dis~u'ssion is tliat as found by the .Tribu·
nal; .the succession was from Guru t.o Chela1 that Bhai Bliagtu was a 1
Udasi Saint and there are Samadhs on the premises~o11e of Bhai
G and
Bhagtu' .the other of hls mother. Evidence 'shows that there are
photos of Hirtdu deities in the illstitution. These. three fads, •Without
anything more, would be su:(llcient to rejectthe case of.the respeorident
·i that the institution is aSikli Gurdwara: We" would like to, reiterate ,
of
i that existence Samadhs and succession from Gum to Chela would'
H I
.·. clearly b~ destrhctive of ~Iiarac~er .·of, ,the institution.' as ~ S!kh.
.
·. Gllrdwara because they are 1ncons1stent with. the tenets of the Sikh
' \ ' ,. ·' ~ ';- ' '
. --~ .
. . - -· . ,_
•.,.,.
.. .\
i,_.r ..,
\
-.·~:
. DASS v. GUR~WARA:PRABANDHAK
PAITAM . COMMITTEE (Misra,!.)
. 581'
.
religion. The issue before the High Court· as .also the Tribunal' was •
· ·whether
( ·..
the institutiOn
'
Dera Bhai .Bhagtu .was- a Sikh Gurdwara. .
' '
-
ileference to ;nother aspect would be· relevant here. Counsel
for the respondent-emphasised the,featnre that there. was evidence .. to,
'show that Guru Graiith Sahib was recited and read in this institution. .
· It.is wellest~blislied that Udasis.are mid:way behveen Sikhs 0 n the
. - '}.,
• one ·hand aitd Hindus 'on the .other. Srichand, son of Guru Nanak,
· the founder of the .Sikhism, had, as already indicated, broken away
and set up 'the Udasi sect. Udasis ~ile venerating Guru Grantk Sahib, - ; '· I
· retained Hindu practices and -~!so showed their veneration to the
.~ Samadhs: From -the very fact. that .Guru Grant4. Sahib' was recited -
'ih this institution, no; support can be drawn,forifh~_.claim that the. in- .c:
stitution was a Sikh.:· Gurdwara. . .' . -
: On the fuateriaTS on record, we_ are .of the view that the findings
~rec.01:ded by the Tribunal as a.lso the High Court are wholly unsllppor-,,
·- table to satisfy the tests indicated in law for determining the character
of the inttitution. We allow the appeal, _reverse the decision of the
. Tribunal as , upheld by the High Court and declare .that Dera '
Bhai Bhagtu is not Sikh Gurdwara. In the ·circumstances of the case
there would be .no order as to costs. , . -
..
S.R. A.ppeal allowea.
·~~-,•
._ -. / --
-I -
·~
, •
-\
•, ~
..
i&.'
'
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Sikh Gurdwara Act"Sign in to search