E-Paper
Christian body moves HC against anti-sacrilege law
The plea seeks quashing of the law terming it “ultra vires the Constitution of India” and seeks restraint order against implementation of the same on the ground that the law creates a religion-specific penal regime by conferring special and elevated statutory protection exclusively to the “saroops” of Guru Granth Sahib
A Christian body — Anglican Church of India — has challenged the Punjab government’s enactment of Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar (Amendment) Act, 2026, notified on April 20.
The Bengaluru-based religious body is formulated by the enactment of Indian Church Act, 1927, and a petition has been filed through its metropolitan bishop Rockes Bernabas Sandhu, a resident of Amritsar.
The plea seeks quashing of the law terming it “ultra vires the Constitution of India” and seeks restraint order against implementation of the same on the ground that the law creates a religion-specific penal regime by conferring special and elevated statutory protection exclusively to the “saroops” of Guru Granth Sahib.
The anti-sacrilege law, is amended version of a 2008 Act, passed unanimously by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha during a special one-day session on April 13, with support from members of the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and opposition parties, including the Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), after three hours of discussion. It was notified on April 20 after the governor accorded assent on April 17.
The Act provides for stringent punishments, including life imprisonment and fines up to ₹25 lakh, for acts of sacrilege against the Guru Granth Sahib.
The plea says the law would result in hostile discrimination and unequal treatment between religions in violation of Articles 14, 15, 25 and 26 of the Constitution and amounting to impermissible state preference of one religion over others, infringing the autonomy of religious denominations, including the petitioner. Hence, during the pendency of the petition, operation of the same be stayed, the plea said.
The petition further says that while enacting the law, the government acknowledged that in recent times, there have been incidents of sacrilege not only of Guru Granth Sahib but also of other holy scriptures, including the Bhagavad Gita and Quran, thereby recognising that the issue of sacrilege is not confined to any one religion alone. “..despite such clear admission and recognition of the need for protection of all religious scriptures, the state has proceeded to enact and strengthen a stringent penal framework exclusively in respect of the “saroops” of Guru Granth Sahib, without extending similar statutory protection to other holy scriptures, thereby resulting in manifest and hostile discrimination between religions and their sacred texts, which is ex facie arbitrary, unequal and violative of the constitutional mandate of secularism and equality,” the plea reads.
It further argued that ex facie, the law is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as it creates a religion-specific penal regime by conferring exclusive and elevated statutory protection upon the “saroops” of Guru Granth Sahib, while denying similar protection to other holy scriptures.
“The classification is inherently discriminatory and results in unequal treatment of religions without any constitutionally permissible basis… the impugned Act fails both tests of reasonable classification and non-arbitrariness and thus amounts to hostile discrimination between religions, rendering it unconstitutional.” it said.
According to the petition, the enactment violates the foundational principle of secularism, which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution. By singling out one religious scripture for special statutory protection and penal consequences, the state has effectively accorded “preferential treatment” to one religion, which is impermissible under the constitutional framework, it claimed.
The plea underlines that the constitution mandates that the state must maintain neutrality and equal respect towards all religions. “Any legislative action that elevates one religion or its symbols above others amounts to a direct infringement of this principle and disturbs the delicate balance of religious harmony,” it added.
It also said that the right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion includes the right to treat one’s own religious scripture as sacred and to have it accorded equal respect in the eyes of law. “The impugned Act, by conferring elevated statutory recognition to only one scripture, undermines this equality. That the legislation, therefore, violates the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom and equal treatment of all religions,” the plea added.
One petition is already pending before the high court challenging the law, filed by an Amritsar resident on similar grounds. The petition of this religious body is yet to be taken up for hearing.
