The attack on Shiromani Akali Dal president Sukhbir Singh Badal in Nanded has once again raised serious concerns about his security. But it has also brought an older political question back into focus: more than a decade after the sacrilege crisis of 2015, how much of the trust deficit between the Akali leadership and sections of the Sikh community has actually been repaired?
The two questions should not be confused.
There is, at this stage, no evidence to establish that the Nanded attack was connected to the political or religious controversies that have followed Badal for years. The motive must come from the police investigation, not political speculation. Indeed, police sources have said that the arrested man, Jaspal Singh, claimed he acted in the "spur of the moment", while initial indications suggested he may have acted alone. Investigators are still examining why the attack took place at all.
Yet, the absence of an established political motive does not make the wider political context irrelevant. Badal has now faced two serious physical attacks at Sikh religious places in less than two years. Not only that, but just weeks before the Nanded incident, a video circulated on social media showing a Sikh man sharply confronting him at Delhi airport and questioning his leadership.
None of these incidents can be treated as a survey of Sikh public opinion. But they have occurred against a continuing debate over whether Badal's political rehabilitation has moved faster than his reconciliation with sections of the Panthic constituency.
That is the larger story.
The Nanded Attack
Badal was attacked on August 13 when he was visiting Gurdwara Mata Sahib Devan Ji in Nanded, Maharashtra. He suffered an injury to his hand when an assailant attacked him with a sharp-edged weapon. A member of his security detail was also injured while intervening. The attacker was detained on the spot.
Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis ordered an investigation into the incident, while questions were immediately raised over how an attacker managed to get so close to a leader with high-level security. The attack also drew strong condemnation across religious and political circles.
Sri Akal Takht Sahib Jathedar Giani Kuldip Singh Gargajj strongly condemned the assault at a Sikh religious complex. SGPC president Harjinder Singh Dhami also condemned it and called for a thorough investigation into the incident.
Speaking to this writer for NDTV, senior SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia rejected the suggestion that the attack reflected lingering public anger against Badal. He described it instead as a deliberate and motivated assault and called for a thorough probe to establish the full circumstances.
That counter-view is important. Political resentment cannot automatically be used to explain a criminal act. But neither can the continuing political debate surrounding Badal be wished away.
The Golden Temple Shooting
The first serious attack occurred on December 4, 2024. Badal was sitting at the entrance of Sri Darbar Sahib in Amritsar, performing sewa as part of the religious punishment imposed upon him by Sri Akal Takht Sahib, when Narain Singh Chaura approached and opened fire. Badal escaped unhurt after the security personnel and people present intervened and overpowered the attacker.
Badal was not addressing an election rally. He was not campaigning. He was sitting outside one of Sikhism's holiest shrines after submitting himself to the authority of Sri Akal Takht Sahib.
He had been declared tankhaiya (guilty of religious misconduct ) over decisions and failures associated with the SAD-led governments between 2007 and 2017. He accepted the punishment and performed sewa at Sikh shrines.
The shooting should not be interpreted as evidence of wider Sikh anger. One attacker cannot speak for a community. But it happened at a moment when the political and Panthic controversies surrounding Badal's leadership were still far from settled.
To understand why, one has to return to 2015.
Ghosts Of 2015
The sacrilege incidents involving Sri Guru Granth Sahib and the subsequent police firing at Behbal Kalan became a defining crisis for the SAD-BJP government. The controversy surrounding the pardon granted by Sikh clergy to the Dera Sacha Sauda chief, Gurmeet Ram Rahim, and its later withdrawal following widespread opposition, further deepened the crisis.
For another ruling party, these controversies might have remained questions of governance, law and order, or political accountability. For the Shiromani Akali Dal, the damage went much deeper. That is because SAD had historically projected itself not merely as another political party but as a principal political representative of Sikh and Panthic interests. When sacrilege incidents occurred, and those responsible were not quickly brought to justice, anger was naturally directed not only at the government but at a party whose political legitimacy had long been rooted in Sikh institutions and Panthic politics. The events became part of the political memory of an entire period. Sukhbir Singh Badal later apologised for his government's failure to ensure that those responsible for sacrilege were brought to justice.
The proceedings before Sri Akal Takht Sahib in 2024 went further. Badal and other Akali leaders faced religious scrutiny over decisions made during the party's years in government, and Badal subsequently performed the tankhah imposed upon him. For him, however, this created two very different processes. One was religious atonement before Sikh institutions. The other is political reconciliation with the electorate. The first can be completed through an institutional religious process. The second has no fixed timetable.
The Airport Confrontation
That distinction became visible again recently when a video circulated online showing a Sikh man confronting Badal at Delhi airport. The man harshly criticised Badal's leadership, accused him of causing damage to the Sikh community, and asked him to step aside.
Again, one angry individual cannot represent Punjab, much less the worldwide Sikh community. Nor should a viral video be converted into evidence of a political wave. But such episodes matter because they fit into a wider political question that SAD itself has been struggling to answer for years: how does the party regain the confidence of sections of its traditional Panthic constituency?
A Tough Road Ahead
SAD is now looking towards the 2027 Punjab assembly election, and Badal is attempting to rebuild the organisation and restore its position as Punjab's principal regional political force. A party can redesign its campaign within weeks. It can appoint new office-bearers, organise yatras, hold rallies, and change electoral strategy. Repairing an emotional relationship with a traditional constituency can take much longer.
Political pundits opine that for many Sikhs who were deeply affected by the controversies of 2015, the issue was never simply about which party controlled the Punjab government. It concerned the sanctity of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, accountability for police action, and the expectations they had from a party historically associated with Panthic politics.
This creates difficult questions for Badal. Has his apology been accepted beyond the institutional religious process? Has performing sewa and accepting the authority of Sri Akal Takht changed perceptions among Sikhs who had turned away from SAD? Has enough time passed for the party to rebuild credibility? And perhaps most importantly for 2027, does a younger generation of Sikh voters look at the events of 2015 with the same passion as those who experienced them first-hand?
Anger Cannot Become A Licence For Violence
Political observers say there must be a clear distinction between democratic anger and violence. Sukhbir Singh Badal's record can be questioned, criticised, and challenged electorally, but no political or religious grievance can justify a physical attack.
Experts also caution against speculating about the motive behind the Nanded incident until the police investigation is complete. Badal has apologised. He has appeared before Sri Akal Takht Sahib. He has undergone religious punishment. He is attempting to rebuild his party. Now comes the much harder test. Religious atonement can be pronounced by an institution. Political forgiveness can only come from the people.
(The author is a senior journalist)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
