Sgpc Monopoly For Printing Guru Granth Sahib Challenged In Hc

[Singhshaster]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/SGPC-monopoly-for-printing-Guru-Granth-Sahib-challenged-in-HC/articleshow/46337226.cms

CHANDIGARH: The monopoly of Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) for printing the Guru Granth Sahib has been challenged in the Punjab and Haryana high court by a US citizen.

Thaminder Singh Anand of California on Saturday moved the high court against the SGPC, pleading that there is no law in Sikh Gurdwara Act which prohibits the publication and distribution of the holy book.

The SGPC had filed a case against Thaminder in Amritsar on November 28, 2014 for unauthorized printing of the Guru Granth Sahib in China and shipping it to other countries. Aggrieved over this, he moved the HC seeking quashing of the FIR filed against him for hurting Sikhs' religious belief (Section 295 of IPC). Hearing the plea, the HC has issued notices to the Punjab government and SGPC, known as the mini-Parliament of Sikhs.

"There is no law or clause under the Sikh Gurdwara Act which prohibits the publication and distribution of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. The sole right to print conferred upon the SGPC is self-created right under its own code of conduct. Self-created right has no force of law," Thaminder argued before the court.

The SGPC had accused him of unauthorized printing of the holy book and supplying it through containers/couriers from China to US and Canada against Sikh 'maryada' (code of conduct).

In his plea, which came up for hearing before Justice Jitender Chauhan, Thaminder argued that the SGPC has no copyright on Guru Granth Sahib. Besides, there is no complaint or protest by the community that the religious feelings have been outraged. The alleged 'maryada' is the creation of the SGPC and has no force of law, he said.

The petitioner also claimed that since he was a US citizen, the IPC did not apply on him and Amritsar police had no jurisdiction to book him. He also argued that in the FIR, SGPC had not disclosed who authorized it to have the sole publisher's right and under which law.

The petitioner pointed out that when litho printing was introduced, Lahore-based Munshi Hira Nand's Yanta Yantaralya Vidya Prakashan and M/s Bhai Chatar Singh Jiwan Singh had published the lithographic volumes of Guru Granth Sahib and Gurbani gutkas. "Later, M/s Bhai Chatar Singh Jiwan Singh started publishing Guru Granth Sahib and gutkas in type printing and they are the pioneers in this field. Similarly, Munshi Hira Nand used to publish Guru Granth Sahib before Partition in Lahore," he argued.

The case has been fixed for next hearing on March 30.

[ms514]

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

Mr. Anand should be more concerned with his status in the Guru's Court. Sending a PDF to China and having hundreds of saroops printed (which, per some sources, he refused to acknowledge actually were printed) and then having them shipped in a container with no Maryada that has been clarified and no authentication of the contents is a dangerous proposal. If this is allowed, the RSS would be allowed to print "Saroops" with who knows what alteration.

Think of the consequences of this case...they are severe.

[Akalifauj]

The issue here is when ssgpc involve secular law to prevent others from so and so. Firstly Sri Akal Takht Sahib has the right to prevent actions and allow. Sgpc has not right. The problem starts with sgpc and stops when they are relieved of their powers and full authority is given back to Akal Takht Sahib.

[Guest Jacfsing2]

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

Mr. Anand should be more concerned with his status in the Guru's Court. Sending a PDF to China and having hundreds of saroops printed (which, per some sources, he refused to acknowledge actually were printed) and then having them shipped in a container with no Maryada that has been clarified and no authentication of the contents is a dangerous proposal. If this is allowed, the RSS would be allowed to print "Saroops" with who knows what alteration.

Think of the consequences of this case...they are severe.

You have a true concern, but what SGPC did Bhai Mani Singh belong to? Or better yet Bhai Gurdas? We should go back to hand written saroops of Guru Sahib:

[S1ngh]

Gahmand (ego) dekho es nataunki bandar da.

[ms514]

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

RSS can hire people to write Saroops with their malicious intent. There are machines that can "hand write" saroops as well.

[S4NGH]

The issue here is when ssgpc involve secular law to prevent others from so and so. Firstly Sri Akal Takht Sahib has the right to prevent actions and allow. Sgpc has not right. The problem starts with sgpc and stops when they are relieved of their powers and full authority is given back to Akal Takht Sahib.

Nailed it.