'Akal Takht' Expels SAD Leader & Granthi, Questions Arise on SGPC’s Role

September

2026

On 20 Sep, Sri Akal Takht Sahib (Eternal Throne) expelled senior Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader and Sikh apex management body Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) member Amarjit Singh Chawla from the Khalsa Panth (Sikh Collective) over rape charges against him. The Akal Takht also expelled granthi (reciter) Malkit Singh over charges leveled by the same woman that he had sent inappropriate messages to her. Announcing the decision, Akal Takht Jathedar (leader) Giani Kuldip Singh Gargajj asked the Sikh community not to associate with him. However, he clarified that the allegations against Chawla and Malkit remain subject to the individuals proving their innocence. Earlier, a woman (name withheld) from Sangrur district, who had returned from Bahrain, had lodged a First Information Report (FIR) on 21 Aug against Chawla alleging rape, threats, and pressure. The woman claims she had met Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Gargajj and SGPC president Harjinder Singh Dhami, who had asked her to file the FIR. The FIR records allegations of a series of incidents between 27 Feb–19 Aug 2026, including one at Bhai Bachittar Singh Yatri Niwas (Inn) in Anandpur Sahib. Giani Gargajj is also the Jathedar of Takht (Throne) Sri Kesgarh Sahib. According to the FIR, the complainant alleged that Chawla established contact with her, gave certain assurances, and subsequently engaged in conduct that she described as sexual exploitation. Chawla, who has since fled to Canada, resigned from his post as SGPC member and SAD senior vice-president, and denied the allegations, calling them false and fabricated. He alleged that a conspiracy had been hatched against him. The case has raised questions about the police, who did not arrest Chawla and allowed him to flee to Canada. It also raises questions about who allotted the woman a room in the inn, gave her a car, and two helpers for personal use. Akali Dal (Waris Punjab De) and Shiromani Akali Dal (Punar Surjeet, revival) are both targeting the Akal Takht and the SGPC. They ask if these institutions—funded by public contributions—were even aware that such activities were going on and if the Akal Takht decision was a move to cover up the case. Chawla has also rebutted the Akal Takht decision, asking why the Akal Takht is passing judgments when a case is pending in the courts. (earlier coverage).