‘Singh’ or ‘Kour’ Not Necessary for Sikh Recognition: Excessive Courtroom

SRINAGAR: The Jammu and Kashmir Excessive Courtroom has clarified that being acknowledged as a Sikh particular person doesn’t require having “Singh” or “Kour” as surnames, addressing a petition difficult District Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee elections in Akhnoor, the place non-Sikh voters have been added to the rolls with out these surnames.

The petitioner, dissatisfied with the statutory appellate authority’s choice, sought aid from the Excessive Courtroom. On the outset, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal referred to J&Okay Sikh Gurudwara & Non secular Endowment Act, 1973 and noticed, “The rivalry of the petitioner, which has been raised by the appellant/petitioner herein earlier than the appellate authority, is opposite to the definition laid down within the Act of 1973, which isn’t acceptable and the identical can’t be sustainable within the eyes of legislation.

There are numerous folks, who would not have “Sikh or Kour” as their Surnames, however nonetheless they’re acknowledged as Sikh, as they preach Sikhism”.

The petitioner, who contested the DGPC election in Akhnoor, challenged the outcomes, citing considerations about non-Sikhs on the electoral roll based mostly on the absence of “Singh” or “Kour” of their surnames. He argued this violated the Jammu and Kashmir Sikh Gurudwara and Non secular Endowment Guidelines, 1975, defining a Sikh by perception within the ten Gurus, Guru Granth Sahib, and preserving Keshas (lengthy hair).

The bench, after analyzing the foundations and contentions, upheld the appellate authority’s choice, stating the petitioner’s claims contradicted the definitions in Sections 2(e) and a couple of(f) of the Act of 1973. Rejecting the argument that “Singh and Kour” surnames have been necessary for Sikh recognition, the bench deemed such a rivalry inconsistent with authorized definitions.

“There are numerous folks, who would not have “Sikh or Kour ” their Surnames, however nonetheless they’re acknowledged as Sikh, as they preach Sikhism. This facet of the matter has gone into element by the appellate authority and this Courtroom concur with the discovering recorded by the appellate authority and don’t discover any authorized infirmity with the identical”, Justice Nargal recorded.

The courtroom additional famous that the petitioner had not raised any objections concerning the electoral roll throughout the designated interval for claims and objections. It noticed that elevating such points at a later stage, after taking part in the whole election course of was not permissible.

“This can be a peculiar case, the place the appellant having did not avail the chance of submitting of claims and objections throughout the notified interval and taking an opportunity to take part within the election and subsequently having failed, has circled by submitting the moment petition on false and flimsy grounds with none foundation”, mentioned the courtroom.

Accordingly, the courtroom upheld the order of the appellate authority, dismissing the attraction as devoid of benefit and substance.(Dwell Regulation)