Mann govt to introduce new sacrilege bill in Punjab: Protecting faith or legitimising violent fanatics who lynch and harass people over dubious allegations
On the surface, an anti-sacrilege bill may appear to be a step to protect religious sentiments. However, when such bills are examined more closely, they open a dangerous legal doorway to embolden vigilantes, legitimise mob violence, and erode the constitutional framework of justice and due process. On 5th July, the Chief Minister of Punjab, Bhagwant Mann, met representatives of the Sarb Dharam Beadbi Rokko Kanoon Morcha during which he announced that a new bill would be introduced in the Punjab Assembly against sacrilege.
The bill proposes life imprisonment and potentially even the death penalty for those accused of desecrating religious scriptures, which include the Guru Granth Sahib, Quran, Bible and Bhagavad Gita. In a statement, Mann argued that the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) is silent on scripture desecration and hence it is necessary to bring a special state law. Notably, two such bills have been pending since 2018 for the President’s approval.
Mann has called a special session of the Punjab Assembly on 10th and 11th July to table the bill. The Cabinet is expected to clear the bill before the session. Sacrilege is a major political issue in the state of Punjab, and by reviving it, Mann has set foot on a slippery slope.
Pakistan’s blasphemy model – a cautionary tale
While Punjab is looking at a possible anti-sacrilege act, provided the Mann government manages to get approval from the President, it has to be noted that such acts have far-reaching consequences. Pakistan is a textbook example of what happens when a state writes laws on religion not as protection, but as punishment.
Pakistan’s blasphemy laws are based on colonial laws which were later Islamised by Zia-ul-Haq in the 1980s. Sections 295 to 298 of the Pakistan Penal Code or PPC deal with so-called blasphemy. While the laws are supposed to protect religious sentiments, misuse of the laws has led to a wave of lynchings, murders, and wrongful imprisonments, most often without evidence. These laws have been used to settle personal vendettas as well.
For instance, in Pakistan’s Sialkot in 2021, a Sri Lankan factory manager, Priyantha Kumara, was lynched and set ablaze by a mob for allegedly tearing a poster with Quranic verses. The allegations were later found to be baseless.
In 2023, over 20 churches and dozens of Christian homes were torched following an unverified claim that pages of the Quran were desecrated.
In May 2024, a Christian man was stoned to death by a mob for allegedly desecrating the Quran in Sargodha. His family insisted he was mentally unstable.
In all the cases, there was no due process, no proof, and just an accusation that led to an unfortunate death. Human rights groups, though sounding like a joke when it comes to Pakistan, have repeatedly called for the repeal of these laws. Pakistan’s own HRCP has called for the same. However, the damage caused by such laws has been institutionalised.
India is not far behind – mob justice over “hurt sentiments”
India too has witnessed disturbing incidents that reflect a similar pattern. Over the last decade, several people have been assaulted, killed, or harassed over unverified claims of sacrilege or disrespect to religion. With this new bill, the state of Punjab risks formalising this outrage culture.
For instance, in December 2021, a man was lynched inside the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar for allegedly attempting sacrilege. No legal process was followed. The mob acted as judge, jury and executioner.
In the same month, just days after the Golden Temple incident, another man was killed by a mob on mere suspicion of sacrilege in Kapurthala. Later, the police confirmed that no desecration had occurred. Yet, the man was already dead.
A labourer was killed by Nihang Sikhs at the Singhu border during the farmer protests in October 2021, claiming the man attempted sacrilege. His mutilated dead body was hung at the border as a warning to others.
Similar cases have happened in other states as well. For example, in June 2022, tailor Kanhaiya Lal was brutally murdered by radical Islamists for a social media post. His killers filmed the act and justified it as “blasphemy revenge”.
In all the cases, the lynching occured without concrete evidence. The mob acted before the law could take its course. Imagine a legal system that now gives these mobs the power to claim legitimacy through legislation. This opens the possibility that individuals may face severe punishment, including life imprisonment or even death, based on mere accusations
Dangerously vague definitions, dangerous implications
The real problem with such laws is not just in their intent. The issue is how they are defined and enforced. How does the law or the people enforcing it define “sacrilege”? Is tearing a religious book blasphemy? Can quoting scriptures in a debate lead to a complaint under the new law? Is drawing cartoons going to become a blasphemy act, or will posting memes fall under the purview?
When laws are not clear and well-defined or have loopholes, vagueness becomes a weapon. There is no technological or forensic method to prove someone’s intent, whether complainant or accused, in these cases. When sentiments run high, facts become irrelevant. It becomes all too easy for a neighbour, business rival, or a political opponent to level an accusation and let the mob or the police handle the rest. The case may go on for years, even decades, while the accused, even if he or she has done nothing, will live looking over the shoulder for the rest of their life.
Constitutional clash – a state law against a secular spirit
While the Mann government insists the matter lies in the Concurrent List, which gives states the right to legislate, the bill, if it becomes law, will possibly be in violation of Articles 14 (equality), 19 (free speech), and 21 (right to life) of the Constitution of India.
Moreover, BNS Sections 298 and 299 already deal with religious insults. Under these two sections, jail terms of up to two and three years have been prescribed respectively. It reflects a balanced approach. However, the proposed Punjab bill seeks capital punishment. This disproportionate leap raises fundamental legal questions.
If passed, it may be challenged in the courts. However, it will set a precedent for other states to follow, which they may do out of compulsion of vote bank politics.
Conclusion
CM Mann claimed his bill protects the faithful. However, it is the citizens who need protection first. The Punjab government is reviving the dangerous idea of criminalising “hurt sentiments”. So far, there is no clarity if it is going to be a blanket law or will have watertight definitions.
Punjab, a state under extreme financial burden, needs investment in education, de-radicalisation, police reforms, and fast-track courts for real crimes. There is no need to empower the vigilantes with legal muscle.
There is no need for another headline “accused of sacrilege, lynched by mob”. Justice must not be buried. The state must not surrender to populist pressures or allow legal systems to be shaped by emotion over evidence.
News