Bandi Singhs and Punjab 2027: Resolving the Past Without Reopening Old Wounds

As Punjab moves towards the 2027 Assembly election, an issue rooted in one of the state's most difficult periods has again entered mainstream politics. The debate over the "Bandi Singhs", the term commonly used by Sikh organisations for prisoners convicted in militancy-related cases, has gathered fresh momentum through protests, religious mobilisation and renewed demands for parole or release.

The immediate focus is Jagtar Singh Hawara, convicted for his role in the 1995 assassination of former Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh. Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann has supported a 10-day parole for Hawara to meet his ailing mother and recently met his family and supporters. This represents a significant change from the state government's earlier position opposing his parole. The matter has now become part of a wider political debate over how Punjab and the Centre should deal with prisoners connected with the militancy era.

But this is precisely the kind of issue that requires more maturity than political point-scoring.

From a Panthic Demand to a Political Issue

The Bandi Singhs question is not new. The Qaumi Insaaf Morcha has been campaigning near the Chandigarh-Mohali border since January 2023, while the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee has repeatedly raised the matter through petitions, representations and religious programmes.

What has changed is its political visibility. The Punjab bandh called by the Qaumi Insaaf Morcha on August 21 received substantial support in several parts of the state. Markets remained shut in many areas, transport was affected and Panthic organisations and some farmer groups participated. Heavy police deployment was made across major districts, although the mobilisation remained largely peaceful.

Days later, the SGPC organised ardas programmes at historic gurdwaras and its educational institutions seeking relief for Bandi Singhs. The SGPC has previously undertaken a signature campaign claiming support from around 26 lakh people for its demands concerning nine Sikh prisoners. The issue has therefore moved beyond isolated demonstrations. It now carries religious, humanitarian and electoral dimensions.

With the Assembly election approaching, every major political formation has reason to pay attention. AAP needs to protect its support among Sikh voters. The Shiromani Akali Dal is seeking to recover its traditional Panthic space. Congress remains an important player, while the BJP is attempting to expand its political footprint in Punjab. Newer Sikh-oriented political formations are also competing for influence. The danger is that unresolved legal cases could become instruments of competitive Panthic politics.

Hawara's Case Illustrates the Complexity

The case of Hawara shows why the debate cannot be reduced to a simple question of "release or no release". Hawara was convicted as a conspirator in the assassination of Beant Singh, who was killed along with others in a suicide bombing outside the Chandigarh Civil Secretariat on August 31, 1995. His death sentence was subsequently commuted to life imprisonment by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

His present request, however, concerns temporary parole rather than cancellation of his conviction. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in July laid down a time-bound procedure for considering his parole application. Importantly, the court proceedings also highlighted the complicated jurisdictional question involved because Hawara is currently lodged in Delhi's Mandoli jail.

The distinction matters. Supporting consideration of parole under existing law does not require anyone to justify the crime for which a prisoner was convicted. This point has been demonstrated by an unusual degree of political consensus. Punjab Congress president Amrinder Singh Raja Warring has supported Hawara's parole. BJP voices have also supported humanitarian consideration. Most significantly, Ravneet Singh Bittu, grandson of Beant Singh, has supported allowing Hawara to meet his mother.

When even the family of an assassination victim can distinguish humanitarian relief from justification of the crime, Punjab's political discourse should be capable of making the same distinction.

The Question of Equal Treatment

Another factor keeping the issue alive is a perception among sections of the Sikh community that prisoners are not always treated equally. That perception was reinforced when Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh was granted another 21-day furlough in August. It was reportedly his 17th temporary release since his conviction in 2017. Sikh organisations immediately contrasted these repeated releases with the difficulties faced in securing parole for Hawara.

Legally, the cases are not necessarily comparable. Different prisoners are governed by different jurisdictions, sentences, prison rules and security assessments. But governments must also recognise the importance of public confidence in equal application of law. The solution is not to deny parole to one prisoner because another has not received it. Nor should somebody automatically receive parole because another prisoner has. The better principle is simple: comparable legal standards should be applied transparently to everyone.

Rajoana and the Need for Timely Decisions

Balwant Singh Rajoana's case adds another dimension. Convicted in the Beant Singh assassination case and sentenced to death, Rajoana has spent decades in prison while the issue surrounding his mercy petition and commutation has remained unresolved. Such cases should not remain indefinitely suspended between politics and administration.

A constitutional democracy has every right to punish terrorism and political violence firmly. Punjab knows better than most states why such firmness is necessary. But the strength of a democracy is also demonstrated by its ability to decide difficult cases according to established law rather than leaving them unresolved for decades.

This is where both the Union and state-level institutions can play a constructive role. The Bandi Singhs issue should not be converted into another Centre-versus-Punjab confrontation. Different cases involve different governments, prison administrations, courts and constitutional authorities. Simplifying every delay as deliberate action by New Delhi may be politically convenient, but it does little to resolve the underlying cases.

What is needed instead is institutional clarity.

No Space for Glorification of Violence

There must, however, be an equally clear boundary.

Humanitarian consideration for prisoners cannot become a route for romanticising Punjab's militancy period. The violence of the 1980s and 1990s killed civilians, political representatives, police and security personnel and left thousands of families carrying painful memories. Beant Singh himself was assassinated along with others in 1995.

Punjab cannot build reconciliation by remembering the suffering of only one side. Recent attempts to glorify individuals involved in political assassinations therefore deserve careful scrutiny. There is a fundamental difference between demanding lawful consideration of a prisoner's case and presenting political violence as heroic or justified. Punjab's religious and political leadership should maintain that distinction.

Punjab Needs Resolution, Not Polarisation

There is a constructive path available.

Authorities could undertake a transparent case-by-case review of prisoners whose cases are repeatedly raised under the Bandi Singhs campaign. The review should examine the actual sentence imposed, period already served, conduct in prison, pending appeals or mercy petitions, eligibility for remission or temporary release and relevant security assessments.

Some prisoners may qualify for relief. Others may not.

What matters is that decisions are made within a reasonable timeframe and reasons are clearly communicated. Such an approach would also weaken attempts to turn administrative delays into evidence of discrimination against an entire community. Punjab's political parties, meanwhile, should resist turning the issue into a competition over who represents Sikh interests more authentically. The state's younger generation faces unemployment, drugs, organised crime, agricultural stress, groundwater depletion and migration. These challenges deserve far more political attention than another cycle of confrontation over the past.

Punjab should neither forget its history nor remain trapped by it.

The Bandi Singhs debate provides an opportunity for India's democratic institutions to demonstrate that even the most sensitive legacy issues can be addressed through law, transparency and compassion.

As 2027 approaches, the real question should therefore not be which political party benefits from the Bandi Singhs issue. It should be whether Punjab's leadership and India's institutions can finally resolve legitimate pending questions without allowing the wounds of an earlier generation to become the political fault lines of the next.