Constructing the Other: The Indian State’s Long War on Sikh Identity

The period following India’s independence in 1947 marked a significant turning point for the Sikh community, laying the groundwork for enduring grievances. Partition devastated Punjab, dividing it between west and east Punjab, forcing millions, including Sikhs and Muslims, to flee their homes amid horrific massacres on both sides. Hundreds of thousands of Sikhs, lost ancestral lands and sacred shrines in West Punjab (now Pakistan) and resettled in India, only to face marginalization in employment, education, and politics.

Despite their major role in the independence struggle, assurances given to Sikhs regarding recognition of their faith and distinct identity were excluded from the Indian Constitution. In the following decades, Sikh efforts to assert cultural and linguistic rights were met with repression. The Punjabi Suba movement, which aimed to secure the status of the Punjabi language, was met with intense state violence. Over 60,000 Sikhs were imprisoned, and in 1955, the Punjab Police stormed the Golden Temple complex—one of the holiest Sikh sites—marking an early and symbolic act of state aggression.

Legal and Constitutional Marginalization of Sikh Identity

The Indian state’s strategic marginalization of Sikhs is deeply embedded in its legal and constitutional framework, particularly through the refusal to recognize Sikhism as a distinct religion on par with others. Despite fervent protests from the Sikh community, the Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, legally categorizes Sikhs as a sect of Hindus under Article 25(b). This categorization persists despite over 70 years of consistent objection from the Sikh community, who view it as a fundamental denial of their unique religious identity.

This legal subsumption extends to personal law matters, notably marriage. While the British colonial administration had recognized Sikh marriages under the Anand Karaj Act of 1909, post-independence India effectively replaced this with the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955. Consequently, Sikhs are required to register their marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, and to obtain a marriage license, they must sign a form explicitly titled ‘The Hindu Marriage Act of 1951’.

The legal ambiguity surrounding Sikhism’s distinct status set the stage for post-independence challenges in defining their place within the Indian legal framework. Many Sikhs perceive this constitutional categorization as a profound betrayal of pre-independence promises that guaranteed protection of Sikh values and cultural autonomy. This legal mechanism is a profound form of identity marginalization. By denying Sikhism its independent religious status within the state’s foundational document, India implicitly asserts a singular, Hindu-centric national identity.

Before the Storm: Repression of Sikh Political Expression in Postcolonial India:

In the decades following independence, the Indian state’s response to Sikh political activism laid the groundwork for future unrest. Central to this early repression was the Punjabi Suba movement, launched in the 1950s by the Akali Dal, which sought the creation of a Punjabi-speaking state to safeguard Sikh linguistic and cultural identity. Although the demand mirrored similar successful campaigns elsewhere in India, it was uniquely branded as “communal” and “separatist” by the central government. This framing justified a harsh crackdown: between the mid-1950s and early 1960s, over 57,000 Sikhs were arrested during peaceful agitations.

The most shocking episode came in July 1955, when Punjab Police stormed the Golden Temple complex, beating protestors and desecrating the sacred site—a move that deeply wounded Sikh religious sentiment and trust in the Indian state. Even after the eventual formation of a truncated Punjabi-speaking state in 1966, Sikh political demands continued to be met with suspicion and repression. This systematic criminalization of Sikh political expression in the postcolonial period—long before the turbulence of the 1980s—established a pattern of marginalization, state surveillance, and force that would shape the trajectory of Sikh-state relations for decades to come.

Khalistan – Separatist Movement of Sikhs

The Khalistan movement, which advocates for an independent Sikh homeland, has roots that trace back to the tumultuous 1940s. As the British prepared to exit India, Sikh leaders grew increasingly concerned about their community’s future in a Hindu-majority state. The Lahore Resolution of 1940, which laid the groundwork for the creation of Pakistan, inspired parallel Sikh fears of marginalization. Some Sikh factions briefly explored the idea of an autonomous Sikh state, often referred to as “Sikhistan” but this vision was sidelined during Partition negotiations. 

In independent India, broken promises regarding Sikh autonomy, the omission of Sikh identity in the Constitution, and repeated suppression of Sikh political demands, especially during the Punjabi Suba movement, contributed to a growing sense of betrayal. By the 1970s and 1980s, calls for Khalistan gained traction, particularly following state violence, economic grievances, and cultural marginalization.

The storm – 1984

The year 1984 represents a pivotal and traumatic watershed moment in the history of Sikh marginalization in India, characterized by state-sanctioned violence and a pervasive culture of impunity.

Operation Blue Star: The Assault on the Golden Temple

Operation Blue Star was a military operation conducted by the Indian Armed Forces between June 1 and 10, 1984, with the stated objective of removing Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and other Sikh militants from the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) complex in Amritsar, the holiest site of Sikhism. Ordered by then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi after negotiations failed, the operation was divided into “Operation Metal” to clear the Golden Temple and “Operation Shop” for wider sweeps across Punjab.

Eyewitness accounts reveal that Indian security forces began firing into the Harmandir Sahib as early as June 1, four days before the official army entry, causing 34 bullet holes and killing eight pilgrims, including a woman and a child. The army quickly escalated to using heavy weaponry, including tanks, helicopters, and artillery, to dislodge militants from the fortified complex. A critical aspect of the operation was its timing: it was launched during a major Sikh religious holiday, Guru Arjan Singh’s martyrdom day, when the temple complex was overflowing with thousands of worshippers. A shoot-on-sight curfew was imposed, trapping over 10,000 pilgrims inside. Eyewitnesses reported horrific acts, including the execution of over 150 people, some with their hands tied behind their backs, at point-blank range. Furthermore, the Sikh Reference Library, which housed rare Sikh manuscripts and historical artifacts, was reportedly burned by Army troops after they gained control of the building.

While official figures claimed 554 Sikh militants and civilians and 83 Army personnel were killed, non-governmental sources estimate civilian deaths ranging from 4,000 to 8,000Many bodies were hastily cremated by the army to destroy evidence. This sent shockwaves through the sikhs, and everyone familiar with the history of sikhs knew the reaction was imminent- and the reaction came.

The Revenge and the Genocide: 1984 Sikh Genocide

Indian Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi was murdered by her Sikh bodyguards on October 31, 1984 in act of vengeance. This served as a pretext for a series of organized pogroms against Sikhs across India, particularly in Delhi and other parts of North India, from October 31 to November 3. This was not a spontaneous outburst but a “campaign of premeditated, organized violence,” which included killings, sexual and gender-based violence, torture, and the widespread desecration and destruction of gurdwaras, libraries, homes, and businesses. 

According to the Nanavati Commission, 2,733 people were killed in Delhi alone, while official government figures reported 2,146 Sikhs killed in Delhi and 586 in other parts of the country. Despite numerous investigations by ten commissions and committees over the decades, including the Marwah, Misra, Kapur Mittal, Jain Banerjee, Potti Rosha, and Nanavati Commissions, very few convictions have occurred, and many perpetrators have evaded justice. 

1980s-1990s: The “Decade of Disappearances” and Extrajudicial Killings

Following the 1984 events, from 1984 through the mid-1990s, the Indian government conducted extensive counterinsurgency operations in Punjab that led to widespread and systematic human rights violations. These included arbitrary detention, torture, extrajudicial executions, and enforced disappearances of thousands of Sikhs. Young Sikh men were frequently abducted by police, often in the presence of witnesses, but their custody was subsequently denied; most victims are believed to have been killed.

To conceal these crimes, security forces secretly disposed of bodies, primarily through mass cremations. The Indian government later admitted to illegally cremating 2,097 individuals in Amritsar alone. Special counterinsurgency laws and a system of rewards and incentives for police to capture and kill militants contributed to a surge in “disappearances” and extrajudicial executions of both civilians and militants. Human Rights Watch characterized these operations as “the most extreme example of a policy in which the end appeared to justify any and all means, including torture and murder”. 

The events of 1984, encompassing Operation Blue Star and the subsequent anti-Sikh pogroms, followed by a decade of systematic abuses, strongly indicate a state-sanctioned campaign rather than spontaneous outbreaks of violence or isolated rogue actions. The sheer scale, coordination, timing (especially during a religious holiday), and subsequent cover-up (including secret cremations and judicial failures) point to a deliberate strategy to crush Sikh dissent and marginalize the community through extreme violence, utilizing the assassination of Indira Gandhi as a pretext. 

This pattern of actions moves beyond mere “riots” to a systematic suppression indicative of genocide or crimes against humanity, demonstrating a state-level intent to control a minority group.

Political Disenfranchisement and Suppression of Dissent

In addition to the “Legal” and “Violent” marginalization, the Indian state has also systematically and politically marginalized Sikhs by suppressing dissent and controlling their representation, often through the strategic branding of any opposition as “Khalistani.”

Branding of Sikhs as “Khalistanis” to Delegitimize Dissent

Since post-independence, any demand by Sikhs for minority rights protection or linguistic rights has been immediately labeled as “separatist”. Sikhs who express concerns about injustices or discuss their history are frequently branded as “brainwashed Khalistani ISI agents”. This labeling extends even to broader movements; farmers protesting have been accused of having a pro-Khalistan agenda, leading to actions by India’s National Investigation Agency against their leaders. This branding is used to criminalize the right to self-determination, even when expressed through symbolic or non-binding referendums by diaspora groups. The state often fails to differentiate between legitimate separatism, cultural expression, and peaceful dissent, treating all as a threat.

This broad and indiscriminate application of the “Khalistani” label is a highly effective political tool for the Indian state. It serves to delegitimize all forms of Sikh dissent, regardless of their actual separatist intent, by associating them with a violent, extremist movement. This allows the state to justify arrests, media blackouts, and even transnational repression under the guise of national security. It creates a chilling effect, forcing Sikhs to constantly prove their loyalty and discouraging any collective action for their rights, thereby achieving political marginalization through fear and suppression of free speech. 

Criminalized Yet Unbroken: The Ongoing Resistance of Sikh Political Voices

The suppression of dissent is further exemplified by the current jailings of Sikh leaders and the denial of their political rights. Amritpal Singh, a prominent Sikh leader, is currently imprisoned in Assam’s Dibrugarh Jail under the stringent National Security Act (NSA), accused of plotting against India with ISI support and radicalizing Sikh youth. Despite his incarceration, he won the 2024 Lok Sabha election from jail. Concerns have been raised about the denial of his constitutional right to attend parliamentary sessions, with claims of a “malicious intent” to vacate his seat after 60 days of absence, thereby disenfranchising his constituency. Beyond high-profile cases, there are accounts of long-term imprisonment of Sikh protestors, some for 30-40 years, for the “crime of demanding justice” and “equal rights”.

Prominent Sikh leaders have consistently exposed the Indian state’s actions. Simranjit Singh Mann, president of Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar), has repeatedly criticized the Indian government for the killing, torture, and disappearance of Sikhs in the 1980s and 90s. Mann has also vociferously opposed the construction of the Sutlej Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal, arguing it violates Punjab’s riverine water rights and will lead to “permanent desertification,” viewing it as economic warfare against Punjab.

Transnational Repression and International Responses

The Indian state’s strategic marginalization of Sikhs has increasingly extended beyond its borders, manifesting as alleged transnational repression against Sikh leaders in Western countries, leading to significant international diplomatic fallout.

Target Killings of Sikh Leaders Overseas

Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a prominent Sikh leader and advocate for Sikh self-determination, was assassinated in Surrey, Canada, on June 18, 2023. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau publicly accused agents of the Indian government of involvement in Nijjar’s murder, triggering a significant diplomatic row between Canada and India.

In a separate but related incident, the US Justice Department charged a “former Indian intelligence official, for directing a foiled plot to murder Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a dual US-Canadian citizen and leader of Sikhs for Justice (SFJ). 

The Indian state’s alleged involvement in target killings overseas signifies an alarming escalation of its marginalization strategy. It demonstrates a willingness to disregard international law and the sovereignty of other nations to silence perceived threats from the Sikh diaspora. This effectively creates a global chilling effect, aiming to suppress Sikh activism worldwide and prevent the community from leveraging international platforms for their grievances. 

The Kartarpur Corridor: A story of the Weaponization of Religious Access

The Kartarpur Corridor was inaugurated on November 9, 2019. This project fulfilled a long-standing demand of the Sikh community by providing visa-free, dawn-to-dusk access to Gurdwara Darbar Sahib in Kartarpur, Pakistan, the final resting place of Sikhism’s founder, Guru Nanak Dev.

Despite its initial promise, India unilaterally closed its side of the Kartarpur Corridor indefinitely following escalating border tensions after the Pahalgam attack. This closure abruptly halted the pilgrimage of Indian Sikh devotees to the holy site. In stark contrast, Pakistan has consistently kept its side of the corridor open as a “goodwill gesture,” emphasizing its commitment to religious pluralism and welcoming pilgrims. The unilateral closure by India, undertaken without consulting Sikh stakeholders or considering the profound religious implications, is viewed by many as part of a “systemic pattern of marginalization aimed at undermining the Sikh identity, both at home and abroad.”

India’s unilateral closure of the corridor, even as Pakistan maintains its openness, demonstrates a willingness to weaponize religious access for geopolitical leverage. This action signals that Sikh religious freedom can be curtailed if it intersects with India’s perceived national security interests, particularly concerning cross-border ties with Pakistan.

The Quest for Justice by Sikhs:

Faced with persistent impunity and systemic marginalization within India, the Sikh community, particularly its diaspora, has intensified its efforts to seek justice and international recognition for the 1984 atrocities.

Attempts by Sikhs to Get 1984 Riots Recognized as Genocide

Human rights organizations and Sikh advocacy groups, such as Sikhs for Justice and the Sikh Coalition, have consistently pushed for the recognition of the 1984 anti-Sikh violence as genocide. They argue that the events of 1984, including Operation Blue Star and the subsequent pogroms, constituted a “campaign of premeditated, organized violence” with the “goal of eliminating Sikhs”. This interpretation aligns with the international legal definition of genocide, given the organized nature, scale, and intent behind the violence.

Successes in Recognition

These persistent efforts have led to important recognitions. In July 2023, the California State Assembly passed Assembly Joint Resolution 2 (AJR2), formally acknowledging the “Sikh genocide.” Earlier, in February 2004, the UK Parliament passed Early Day Motion 651 (EDM 651), which highlighted atrocities against Sikhs, including killings, false imprisonment, and disappearances, estimating that over 250,000 Sikhs were killed. These resolutions reflect growing international concern over human rights abuses faced by Sikhs in India.

House Resolution 1554 in the US Congress

House Resolution 1554 (H. Res. 1554), titled “Expressing support for the recognition and commemoration of the Sikh Genocide of 1984,” was introduced in the US House on October 25, 2024. Sponsored by Representative David G. Valadao (R-CA-22), co-chair of the Sikh American Congressional Caucus, it was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. This is the first federal resolution to recognize the 1984 Sikh Genocide, sending a “powerful message” that the atrocities will not be ignored.

If passed, the resolution would mark a significant international acknowledgment of the 1984 atrocities, increasing pressure on India for human rights accountability. It could damage India’s global image, complicate diplomatic relations with Western democracies, and lead to calls for sanctions or international investigations, impacting India’s geopolitical and economic standing.

Conclusion: The Architecture of Marginalization

In sum, the trajectory of Sikh marginalization in postcolonial India reveals a sustained and systemic pattern of repression. From the broken promises of autonomy after Partition to the violent suppression of legitimate political expression—including the events of 1984—successive Indian governments have employed legal, political, and cultural instruments to contain Sikh identity and dissent. The branding of Sikh grievances as “secessionist,” the use of media to reinforce negative stereotypes, and the denial of religious and linguistic rights have collectively fostered deep alienation within the community.

This strategy has extended beyond India’s borders, with acts of transnational targeting and manipulation of religious access, such as the unilateral closure of the Kartarpur Corridor. These actions reflect a state apparatus that views Sikh political expression not as democratic participation but as a threat to national unity.

Usama Khan

Usama Khan holds a degree in International Relations from the University of Exeter and works as an academic. His research focuses on South Asian history, political dynamics, militancy, and civil conflicts.

Related posts:

Hindutva: A Civilisational Gerrymandering of India

The QUAD

AI and LAWS in Warfare: The Tech That Could Tip South Asia’s Power Scale