CHANDIGARH: The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) has demanded a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into allegations involving a Bahrain-based woman’s stay at a sarai (inn) in Anandpur Sahib, claiming its preliminary inquiry found irregularities in the inn’s records. The ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), however, said the SGPC had not clarified who recommended the booking of a room for the woman.
The controversy stems from allegations made by a woman regarding an incident at Anandpur Sahib, which led to intense political scrutiny in Punjab. Political entities, including leaders from the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and different Sikh organisations, including SAD (Punar Surjit), have raised questions regarding the extended stay of the woman at the sarai and demanded accountability.
Talking to the media, SGPC president Harjinder Singh Dhami said that they have received the preliminary findings of its internal inquiry, while the final report was expected in the coming days. Displaying copies of inn (sarai) registers and saying they contained entries related to the woman's stays and payments made for accommodation, Dhami claimed that some entries in the accommodation registers appear to have been added or altered to create the impression that the woman had stayed at the gurdwara sarais on several occasions. He added that departmental action was being initiated against employees allegedly linked to the irregularities.
"The manager and other officials associated with the inn (sarais) at Anandpur Sahib are among those facing scrutiny," he said.
Dhami added that, according to the records presented, around seven entries were made in her name in the registers of inns (sarais) at Anandpur Sahib. "Eight entries were cited in connection with accommodation at the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, while another entry was linked to Gurdwara Amb Sahib in Mohali," he said.
Dhami noted what he described as additional entries that appeared to have been inserted after the dates originally recorded in the registers and alleged that some serial numbers had also been changed.
He said handwriting samples of an employee suspected of making some of the additional entries had been sent for examination. He identified Amrik Singh, who is associated with the inn (sarai) administration at Anandpur Sahib, as one of the employees under investigation. Dhami said the preliminary inquiry had also indicated the possible involvement of other employees and senior officials, followed by departmental proceedings.
Dhami demanded a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the matter and questioned the state police investigation, alleging that the case was being turned into a "social media trial". He claimed that the SGPC, as a Sikh religious institution, was being deliberately targeted and that the controversy could damage its reputation.
Dhami also alleged that political interests were behind the controversy. He maintained that if any allegation against him was established, he would resign from his post, but urged that unsubstantiated claims should not be levelled against him. He further said he had no prior knowledge of the developments surrounding the woman.
He said the SGPC's internal committee had been constituted specifically to examine departmental and administrative issues. He clarified that the committee was not investigating why the woman came to the area, who brought her there or the purpose of her visit. Dhami said those questions fell outside the scope of the internal departmental inquiry.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Punjab Media In-charge Baltej Pannu said that nobody was attacking the SGPC as an institution and that the questions being raised were directed at those responsible for running it and anyone who may have misused their positions.
He said, "There is no attack on the institution (SGPC). This is about asking questions to the people who are running it. Those who have the responsibility of running an institution must also be accountable for what happens under their watch."
Pannu said that the SGPC did not belong to any individual but to the entire Sikh community, which had made sacrifices to establish and run the institution.
"The institution is not Harjinder Singh Dhami’s. It belongs to the entire Sikh community," he said, adding that questioning those holding positions of responsibility was necessary to protect the institution rather than damage it.
He questioned why Dhami had not clarified who recommended the booking of a room for the woman at the Amritsar sarai when she visited.
"If the SGPC has records of the rooms in which she stayed at Sri Anandpur Sahib and Amritsar, then those records should also establish who booked those rooms and under whose recommendation. Why has this basic question not been answered?" he asked.
"If someone has made a mistake, pointing it out does not mean damaging the institution. Those who are responsible for running an institution must answer questions about its functioning," Pannu said.
Pannu also demanded that Dhami make public the application submitted by the woman seeking Rs one lakh in cancer-related assistance, after removing her name and other personal details if necessary.
"What medical documents were submitted with the application? Who recommended the assistance? Why was treatment sought elsewhere when the SGPC itself runs hospitals, including Guru Ram Das Hospital? The complete record can help answer these questions," he said.
Pannu said, "If they have nothing to hide, make the application public after protecting the woman’s identity. Let the facts speak for themselves."
Questioning the 15-day fact-finding exercise ordered by the SGPC, Pannu asked whether the committee had questioned the manager, staff and other people connected with the matter, examined vehicle movement records, identified drivers and checked who made the bookings at different sarais.
"Did the committee question the manager? Did it question the staff? Did it speak to other people connected with the matter? Did it examine vehicle records? Did it identify the drivers? Did it check who made the bookings at different sarais?" he asked.
"If a CBI inquiry is being proposed, then its complete record must also be discussed. People have a right to ask what confidence they should place in another inquiry without addressing what happened in the earlier cases," Pannu said.