MGC reply to Sucha Singh interview – Letter


Letter | Malaysia | 29 April 2017 | Asia Samachar |

MGC LETTER: Reply to Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview on Gurvichar Website

Malaysian Gurdwara Council (MGC) letter dated 27 April 2017 – entitled ‘Reply to Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview on  GUR VICHAR Website’ –  was emailed to Asia Samachar for immediate publication. The letter will be mailed out to all gurdwaras in Malaysia, says MGC president Jagir Singh.




Datuk Sucha Singh Ji who had served as President of MGC from 1997 to 2001 had given interview recently to “Gur Vichar” which appeared on its website in 3 parts on 30/3/2017, 31/3/2017 & 1/4/2017.

Datuk Ji had made some comments which had cast aspersions on the running of MGC and he had also discussed extensively about Dasam Granth and in the course had made some deceptive and inaccurate statements. Therefore an explanation is due to the Gurdwara committees and the Sanggat.

Before the explanation as below, an apology is hereby tendered to Sanggat for this reply, as the time should be better spent in Guru Ki Sewa instead of engaging in such an exchange. The MGC here is only exercising its right of reply, otherwise falsehood will triumph. The MGC on its own will not take first step to attack any other organisation or society.

NOTE: Sanggat should test Datuk Sucha Singh’s allegations and the reply given here with documents Appendixes “A” to “I” which are filed here at the end.

Below is given first a quote of what Datuk Ji said, followed by comment by MGC.


PART TWO (of interview):

  • Datuk Ji (In response to question 6):

“ In all my years with MGC there were no issues relating to Dasam Granth. The   authenticity and position of the Dasam Granth was never questioned, raised or         discussed in the MGC or the Gurdwaras”.


It was not only during Datuk’s time that authenticity and position of Dasam Granth       was never questioned, raised or discussed in the MGC or the Gurdwaras, but all along      since MGC’s inception in 1988.

In MGC letter dated 12/07/2016 addressed to all Gurdwaras amongst others, the             following was stated :

“In the long History of the Gurdwaras of more than 130 years no Semagam pertaining to ‘Dasam Granth’ has been done or organized in a Gurdwara in Malaysia, except the recent 1st case at Gurdwara Sahib Titiwangsa from 22/04/2016 to 24/04/2016.”

Thus, prior to 22/04/2016, there was no issue relating to Dasam Granth (Bachittar          Natak – Strange Dramas)(DG/BN) as “(A)KAL USTAT” Semagams were not held. In fact, after Gurtagaddi was bestowed by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji on Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji (SGGS Ji) in 1708, the human Guruship was ended for all time and the living Guru henceforth for the Sikhs is SGGS Ji. Therefore, after 1708 there can only be Darbar of SGGS Ji, who is the eternal living Guru of the Sikhs. The Gurbani says:

ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ

[Translation:The same Guru Nanak Joth had pervaded all succeeding Gurus with only the body forms changed.]

The Sikh Rehat Maryada (Akal Takht – 1945) does not contain any reference to DG (BN). However, in the Nitnem dian Banian, the SRM lists JAP, JAAP and 10 Sawaiyeh and for the evening bani it lists Sodhar Rehras (including Chaupi Sahib). JAAP, 10 Sawaiyeh and Chaupi Sahib are also found in DG(BN). It seems the Nitnem Banis at some stage were included in the DG(BN) but SRM contains no reference to DG(BN),


  • Datuk Ji (In response to same question 6 further says):

“Kirtan and Katha of Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Bani is Gurmat and established Sikh        practices from the time of Guru Ji through to our forefathers and today Kirtan and Katha and Parchar of the bani and Shabads of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji was freely done.”


The Constitution of the MGC is very clear. Clause 3.2 provides “….. and facilitate functional integration for service to the Panth as per the Sikh Rehat Maryada”. Clause 3.2.8 provides “To do such things not inconsistent with the doctrines and ethics of Sikhism (Sikh Rehat Maryada)”. Thus all the member Gurdwaras are bound to follow the SRM.

The SRM is clear in its injunction as to the kirtan and Katha of which Bani can be done. The SRM has only JAAP, 10 Sawaiyeh and Chaupi Sahib, which are also found in DG/BN. There is no mention in SRM as to other parts of DG/BN.


  • Datuk Ji ( In response to same question 6 further says)

“ The Akal Takht and other Four Takhats has issued clear and unequivocal directions   by a Gurmatta and advice in the matter Kirtan and Katha of Dasam Pita’s Bani is allowed, can be conducted and is necessary.”


No such direction or Gurmatta as claimed above has been issued by the 5 Takhts.

However, it is obvious that reference is being made to “ਗੁਰਮਤਾ – ੧” (Gurmatta-1) issued by Sri Akal Takht Sahib dated 6-6-2008.

We attach the said Gurmatta-1 as Appendix-A.

The relevant part of the Gurmatta says :

” ਸਿੱਖ ਪੰਥ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਦੀਆਂ ਜਿਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਰਚਨਾਵਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਸਿੱਖ ਰਹਿਤ ਮਰਿਯਾਦਾ, ਨਿੱਤਨੇਮ ਅਤੇ  ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ   ਸੰਚਾਰ ਲਈ ਸਵੀਕਾਰ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾ ਚੁੱਕਾ ਹੈ, ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਬਾਰੇ ਕਿਸੇ ਨੂੰ ਵੀ ਵਾਦ-ਵਿਵਾਦ ਖੜ੍ਹਾ ਕਰਨ  ਦਾ ਕੋਈ  ਅਧਿਕਾਰ ਨਹੀਂ “

[ Translation: “Those rachnava (does not even says Bani, let alone Gurbani) from Dasam Granth (DG) that Panth has accepted and included in the Sikh Rehat Maryada, Nitnem and Amrit Sanchar, no one has the right to create any issue about them.” ]

Thus, where is it stated in the Gurmatta that Kirtan and Katha of Dasam Pita’s Bani is allowed. In Fact Dasam Pita’s name is not mentioned at all.

The DG(BN) has 1428 pages. The “Bani” of JAAP, 10 Sawaiyeh and Chaupi amount to less than 40 pages of DG(BN). About the rest of the more than 1300 pages, there is no mention of it in the SRM, and therefore are excluded.

However, we have following directives relating to the rest of DG(BN) that is not included in the SRM.

i) Resolution No.36672 was passed by Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) after consultation with Jathedar Akal Takht, on August3,1973, which provided :

“ਚਰਿੱਤਰੋ ਪਖਿਆਨ” ਜੋ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਵਿੱਚ ਅੰਕਤ ਹਨ, ਇਹ ਦਸ਼ਮੇਸ਼ ਬਾਣੀ ਨਹੀਂ। ਇਹ ਪੁਰਾਤਨ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਇਤਿਹਾਸਿਕ ਸਾਖੀਆਂ ਦਾ ਉਤਾਰਾ ਹੈ।”

[Translation: “Chritro Pakhyan” which is inscribed in DG(BN) is not Dasmesh Bani. It is the translation of ancient Hindu Mythology.]

Note: The “Chritro Pakhyan” (or erotic compositions) appears between pages 808 to 1388 of  DG(BN), covering 581 pages and thus constitutes more than 1/3 of DG(BN).

Thus, how could the whole DG(BN) be “Dasam Pita’s Bani”. Even, if it was Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Bani, but last Hukam to Sikhs by Dasam Pita was “GURU MANIO GRANTH”, and Guru Ji had bowed before SGGS Ji (the only Granth installed at that time and present), so that there would be no confusion in the minds of the Sikhs on which Granth Gurtagaddi was bestowed.

Had Dasam Pita wanted he could have included other “Bani” in SGGS Ji, but he chose not to. The choice of Bani can only be made by the Satguru and we cannot interfere or question this choice.

Note : Resolution No. 36672 dated 3-8-1973 is attached as Appendix-B.

ii) A Gurmatta, which is against the entire Sikh community, can only be issued by Akal Takht. Since about 1645, Gurmatta’s have only been issued by Akal Takht and the 4 Takhts cannot issue any Gurmatta against the entire Sikh community.

Adesh (ਆਦੇਸ਼) dated 1-5-2014 from Akal Takht refers to the other 4 Takhts as “Takhts” only, but refers to Akal Takht as”ਸਰਬਉੱਚ ਅਸਥਾਨ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖਤ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ॥” (The highest and Supreme Sri Akal Takht Sahib Ji)

(Note : Adesh dated 1-5-2014 attached as Appendix-C)

Times of India Report dated 2-1-2017 :

It is no secret that Giani Iqbal Singh Ji has been trying for sometime to fight the Supremacy of Akal Takht and working towards declaring Patna Sahib Takht as equal to Akal Takht.

The Akal Takht Jathedar had then in 2008 announced before the media “that only Akal Takht could take decisions on significant religious matters concerning the entire community whereas other Takhts including Takht Patna Sahib, could take decisions on local issues”.

In view of the above, Datuk Sucha Singh’s assertion that the 5 Takhts had issued a Gurmatta allowing Dasam Pita’s Bani, is incorrect as the above shows. In Fact the Resolution No, 36672 passed by SGPC (the highest Sikh Religious Authority in the world), clearly says that more than 1/3 of DG(BN) is not Dasmesh Bani but translation of ancient Hindu Mythology.

[Note : TIMES OF INDIA report dated 2-1-2017 is attached as Appendix-D]


  • Datuk Ji (In the same question 6 says)

“What is important and sufficient for the Sanggat and Gursikhs to know is that the        Dasam Granth is read and recited in the five Takhts and what is the position of the        Takhts in Sikh thoughts ? sacred ? ….. Dasam Granth Bani is also recited and sung in     Kirtan in Harmandir Sahib, the historical Gurdwaras, Gurdwaras and Sikhs           worldwide.”


It is incorrect to say that the DG (BN) is read and recited in five Takhats. What is true    is that there is Parkash and reading of DG (BN) in 2 Takhats.

An important point to note is that, from 1720 to 1780’s Sikhs were hunted by the Mughals and they had taken to the jungles to survive. During their absence, the Brahmanical Nirmalas, Sri Chand followers and Mahants had taken control of Gurdwaras.

In early 1920’s the Sikh Panth got together and led by such groups as Gurdwara Sudhar Leher, SGPC and Akal Takhat, the Sikh took back the control of the Gurdwaras from the Nirmalas, Udasi’s and Mahants. After taking control, DG (BN) was removed from Harmandir Sahib together with Vedas and Statues, as being Brahmanical and Anti Gurmat .

The Sikh Panth had removed DG (BN) from Harmandir Sahib in 1923 and now we are trying to go back to the same old Brahmanical ways, and trying to install DG(BN) back. This cannot be right.

A sweeping statement is made at the end that Dasam Granth Bani is also recited and sung in Gurdwaras and Sikhs worldwide. What is true is that a few rachna ( not more than about 80 pages ), are sung in some Gurdwaras.

We had observed earlier, that in Malaysia we had not faced this problem until 22- 4- 2016 when (A)KAL USTAT SEMAGAM was held for the first time.

SEE: Dasam Granth ‘parkash’ in Kuala Lumpur serious transgression of maryada, says MGC

Takhat Patna Sahib is in transgression of the following, by doing Parkash of DG/BN in the Darbar of SGGS Ji:

i) In transgression of S.R.M. by doing Parkash of DG (BN) in the Darbar and on par with SGGS Ji by having “ Chaur”, “ Palki”, “Chandni” “rumaleh”, etc. which is only reserved for SGGS Ji.

ii) In transgression of Gurmatta 1 (Appendix-A),  which only allows DG (BN) to be read and accepted as part of History and Literature, The Gurmatta says:

“ਪਰ ਇਸ ਨੂੰ (DG/BN) ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਮਾਨਤਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਦਿੱਤੀ। ਆਪ ਜੀ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਗੁਰਤਾ ਗੱਦੀ ਕੇਵਲ ਅਤੇ ਕੇਵਲ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗਟ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਨੂੰ ਮਿਲੀ ਹੈ, ਇਸ ਕਰ ਕੇ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਬਰਾਬਰ ਹੋਰ ਕਿਸੇ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਨੂੰ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਸ਼ ਨਹੀਂ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾ ਸਕਦਾ”

[Translation: But Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not award it (DG/BN) equal status as SGGS Ji. Guruship had been bestowed only and only on SGGS Ji. Due to this, no other Granth can be installed “Parkash” like and on par with SGGS JI]

iii) By going against clear Hukam of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji

“ Sabh Sikhan ko Hukum Hai Guru Manio Granth” and by giving equal Status to DG (BN) one is in transgression of the Antam ‘Hukam’ of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

MGC LETTER: Reply to Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview on Gurvichar Website

PART TWO (of interview):

  • Datuk Ji (question 7):

“Consider this. They approve the 10 Savayyeh but ban the rest of the bani in praise of Akaal, Akaal Ustat in which these 10 Sawayeh and other Sawayeh deenan are found. Is this not laughable?”


This is exactly the stand of the SRM which was approved by the whole        worldwide Panth, after deliberating on the matter for more than 12 years. It is this SRM that formulated this stipulation. Thus, is Datuk saying that the whole Panth stand as reflected in SRM is laughable.

Here is another instant of deception. Reference of Akaal Ustat is misleading as there is No bani under such name in Bachittar Natak (DG). The actual name is KAAL USTAT. The beginning verse is SRI KAAL JI SAHAI. The framers of the SRM, in their wisdom, selected 10 Sawayeh. This means, the Panth then had rejected the rest.    



  • Datuk Ji (In same question’s answer)

“ The whole Panth is put to notice that Sri Dasam Granth is inseparable part of the Literature and History of the Sikh Panth. The other Takhts have also directed and advised that the Dasam Granth Sahib’s bani is accepted by the Panth (“Panth Parvanat”) and its Kirtan and Katha is necessary and can be conducted in presence of    Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.”

Comment: The words “Dasam Granth is an inseparable part of Literature and History” need no elaboration. Dasam Granth is only recognised as Literature and History and not    Gurbani. The SRM has not included this History and Literature from DG in the SRM. But of course it can be read and discussed in the house, at Seminars, etc.

Only Akal Takht can issue Hukamnamas and Gurmattas for Sikhs. The other 4 Takhts do not have such authority but may issue such Adesh to their local area.

There was a video clip issued on 30/7/2016 by Academy where Giani Iqbal Singh from Patna Sahib when answering questions put, had given his opinion that Kirtan and Katha of Dasam Granth can be done.

But, this opinion of Giani Iqbal Singh Ji is irreconcilable with Gurmatta-1 and the SRM and is to be rejected.

Even the Takhts are bound by Panth approved SRM.


  • Datuk Ji (Question 8):

“The mandatory part of Ardas includes Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Bani and is in Dasam   Granth. Know that MGC has banned the Ardas in Gurdwaras, how do you feel?…

Gurdwaras now cannot do the Ardas because Ardas includes Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Bani and it is in the Dasam Granth…”


The MGC has never “banned Ardas in Gurdwaras”. To make such an absurd claim is both mischievous and irresponsible. The Ardas is clearly stipulated in the SRM and the whole Ardas for recitation is given. The MGC has always stood by the SRM.

It therefore shows that Datuk Sucha Singh is either ignorant of provisions in the SRM   or is choosing deliberately to mislead Sanggat.

The MGC, since its inception in 1988 had always followed the Sikh Rehat Maryada (1945). It had again lately issued a circular letter dated 17th March 2017 to affirm this, as some miscreants were spreading false rumours.

Note: Kindly see the said MGC letter dated 17-03-2017 and filed here as Appendix-G.


  • Datuk Ji (Question 9)

“ I quote the Sikh Rehat Maryada (English version) published by SGPC in 2000 and     2006 Chapter V, Article VI(c).

Kirtan (Devotional Hymn singing by a group or an individual)

In the congregation, Kirtan only of Gurbani (Guru Granth’s or Guru Gobind Singh’s hymns) and for its elaboration, the compositions of Bhai Gurdas and Bhai Nand Lal, may be performed.”


First Point to note is that the ORIGINAL version of the above is in PUNJABI, which     states :

” ਸੰਗਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਕੀਰਤਨ ਕੇਵਲ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਜਾਂ ਇਸ ਦੀ ਵਿਆਖਿਆ-ਸਰੂਪ ਰਚਨਾ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ ਜੀ ਤੇ ਭਾਈ ਨੰਦ ਲਾਲ ਜੀ ਦੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਦਾ ਹੋ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ”

Therefore the proper translation of the ORIGINAL version is : 

“ In the congregation, Kirtan only of Gurbani or for its elaboration, the compositions of Bhai Gurdas Ji and Bhai Nand Lal Ji’s Bani may be performed.”    

Thus, the English translation contains words “Guru Granth’s or Guru Gobind Singh’s hymns” which are not found in the original Punjabi version.

The person who translated admitted that he had added his own words in many places, in the English translation.

Gurbani” is that which is contained in the 1430 Ang of SGGS Ji.

Even in the translation version, the Word “Guru Gobind Singh’s hymns”, must mean those that had been accepted by and included in the S.R.M. that is JAAP, 10 Sawayyeh and Chaupi.

The second point to note is that, when there is difference in the translated version, then the original version must prevail.

The third point is that, to only quote the translation without producing the original, knowing that the translation is wrong, is indicative of bad faith or mala fidei.

No where in the entire S.R.M. can we find words “ Guru Gobind Singh’s hymns”.

Kindly see attached, the original version in Punjabi which is filed as Appendix-H.

The most important point is that as there were so many complaints relating to the inaccuracy in the translation, the SGPC has removed the translation version from its      website. THIS IS an important point, and non-disclosure of this material point can    amount to an attempt to deceive. The English translation version cannot be used.


PART THREE (of interview):

  • Datuk Ji,

“ And where do we find the Dasam Guru’s writings and utterances? In Dasam Granth of course.


Whether the DG is Dasam Guru’s Bani, in part or wholly, is not for us to debate. The MGC is not the body to make a finding on such issue. The MGC abides by the Dictates of the SRM and the Gurmatta and the directive of the Akal Takhat that all must accept and abide by the Panth sanctioned S.R.M.

The S.R.M. also does not mention the word “ Dasam Granth” or “Dasam Guru’s bani” anywhere.


  • Datuk Sucha Singh:

“ Wither the sanctity, integrity and the independence of the Malaysian Gurdwaras”


What an absurd question. How can membership of GSC [Global Sikh Council] affect the sanctity, integrity and the independence of the Gurdwaras in Malaysia.

This would depend on the leadership chosen. The present leadership has vowed full transparency and a 100% audit check by its Auditors of its Accounts. In all the meetings held, the tea break expenses are personally borne. All travelling is done at personal expense.

The independence of the Malaysian Gurdwaras is assured by holding        Government and other agencies accountable to conform to the constitution. The MGC is in the forefront in ensuring independence of Gurdwaras and that Gurdwaras do not come under influence of Politicians who may use their position to gain favours at expense of independence of Gurdwaras.

The MGC leadership has proven again and again that it would not compromise on Sikh rights and independence of Gurdwaras.

A case in point is the recent Hadi’s Bill to empower States to be able to impose higher punishments for Shariah offences. The MGC leadership had spoken at various forums against it.

The MGC is in the forefront fighting it. This is also because if the Bill is passed it will eventually lead to Hudud Law and to an Islamic State. In an Islamic State the other religions do not have equal rights.

Since, Datuk Sucha Singh has launched a vigorous attack against the MGC as above, let us therefore see what was the MGC standing and direction during his tenure as President about 16 years ago.

Prior to 2005, the MGC had operated from one room allotted by the Gurdwara Sahib Sentul committee. During Datuk Ji’s Presidency, it is common knowledge that Datuk Ji was based in Kluang and hardly attended office which was in Kuala Lumpur although this is understandable due to the distance of about 200 kilometres. One has to ask the Gurdwaras what was the state of affairs of the Council then and a common comment was that it was hardly functioning and Some even had commented that it was in a state of “coma” at that time.

But after 2005, the MGC embarked on the course of restructuring itself. It moved to set-up 2 committees, i.e. the Religious Committee and the Legal Affairs Committee, whose role is advisory in nature and acts as a think-tank. Then in 2008, the National level Istri Satsang Committee was set-up to unite and mobilise the Istri Satsang Nation-wide. The procedure for bringing Granthis was standardised. Allocations for Gurdwaras from Government was obtained. Kirtani Jathas are brought from India, within budget constraints to tour Gurdwaras in Malaysia. MGC is also in the forefront in championing Gurdwaras independence, “Allah” issue to protect Sikh rights, conversion issues (including getting 2 born Sikhs converted back from Islam to Sikhism) were championed, etc.

In 2009, MGC had purchased its own 4-storey building, and has a fully functional Secretariat.

The Government now recognises the MGC as representing the Gurdwaras and the Sikh religion and Sikh interest. Its leaders are appointed on various Government committees.

In short MGC today has transformed itself to play a National role. It is in the forefront not only tackling Sikh issues (such as solving 5 Kakar controversy in schools, getting Ministry of Education to withdraw a controversial book which had blasphemous articles about Sikh Religion and Guru Nanak Dev Ji).

It is in the forefront fighting to retain the independence of the Gurdwaras and the Sikh Religion and to ensure the rights as enshrined in the constitution are protected.


  • Datuk Ji:

“ I humbly urge the Gurdwaras and the Sanggat especially youth to take these    matters seriously to stand up for Guru Gobind Singh Ji, Gurmat and Panth. The           youth is the future of the Panth in Malaysia.

Reclaim your council for Guru Gobind Singh Ji, For the Panth and for the Takhts.


We are surprised and in fact shocked at Datuk Sucha Singh’s above call. This      only shows how far he has drifted away from the MGC and does not know the actual situation or is deliberately misleading Sanggat with a view to achieving certain agenda. His above statement is typical of a politician and his more than 20 years service in the MIC has given him enough political acumen. In fact a person with political leanings should not aspire for any post in a religious body like MGC.

It is common knowledge and the track record of MGC is proof that it has always stood for the Panth and the Takhts. The Takhts as an institution must be respected by all Sikhs. But individuals who abuse their position in the Takhts and contravene SRM and do not act in the interest of the Panth and are self-serving, then they should be held accountable. In view of this the MGC had written to Akal Takht last year imploring Akal Takht to act against transgression of SRM including those doing Parkash of Dasam Granth on Par with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

In fact there is no reason to reclaim this council. It is at present functioning smoothly. The Gurdwaras throughout the country are well aware of the role and contributions of the council and are fully supportive of it.

In fact what needs to be reclaimed is the lost unity of the Sanggat since last April, 2016. 

Therefore, the Sanggat and the Gurdwaras must unite, so that the handful of divisive elements will realise the futility of their attempts to sow discord in Sanggat and turn over to a new leaf.



From the above, it is clear that the allegations levelled against the MGC are baseless and done in furtherance of an agenda to malign MGC to achieve their divisive purpose.

Khalsa Ji, please go through the Appendixes attached from “A” to “I” and test them against what was said by Datuk Sucha Singh Ji. He claims not to have any personal agenda but his vehement attack and the call on people to reclaim the council, lays bare his agenda and betrays his interest in the matter.



The Gurdwaras Parbhandaks and Sanggat must remain united. The Gurdwaras must further be vigilant to ensure that no miscreants use their Gurdwaras name and address to further their agenda to divide the Sanggat and Gurdwaras and turn them against each other. At the moment the divisive forces are engaged in using Gurdwara premises to hold their group’s meeting and then wrongly claim it is Sanggat decision.

The MGC, as history is witness will defend and abide by the SRM. It will always act to defend and insulate the Panth against divisive forces. The Akal Takht and the other 4 Takhts as institutions will always be defended. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, as per Hukam of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji “ Sabh Sikhan Ko Hukam Hai Guru Manio Granth”, will always be the living and Shabad Guru of the Sikhs for all time.



Jagir Singh, President MGC

MGC LETTER: Reply to Datuk Sucha Singh’s interview on Gurvichar Website

The above are extracts from a MGC letter sent to Asia Samachar, which has been confirmed by an official of the organisation. TO READ FULL LETTER, GO HERE.


ASIA SAMACHAR is an online newspaper for Sikhs in Southeast Asia and surrounding countries. We have a Facebook page, do give it a LIKE! Follow us on Twitter. Visit our website:


MGC: NO confusion, only unholy attempt by Academy to confuse (Asia Samachar, 13 April 2017)

MGC statement on Dr Anurag, SGPC support for Ek Granth Ek Panth (Asia Samachar, 17 March 2017)

SGPC exposes Dr Anurag ‘misleading’ claims on research board (Asia Samachar, 12 March 2017)

MGC: Inaccurate and deceptive statement on Ghagaa banned by Akal Takht (Asia Samachar, 6 March 2017)

Dr Anurag’s claims on Ek Granth defective to the core, says Dr Karminder (Asia Samachar, 11 Dec 2016)

Dasam Granth ‘parkash’ in Kuala Lumpur serious transgression of maryada, says MGC (Asia Samachar, 29 Dec 2016)


  1. My thanks to S. GURCHARAN SINGH JI for his comments to which I totally agree. He has agreed to the concerns which I have been raising for past over four decades when I was first asked to audit the accounts of a Gurdwara and observed how the Gurdwara funds were being not only being mismanaged but also in some cases subject to fraud by some office bearers and silence or lack of action by some Mgt Ctee members. I started looking at financial management of other Gurdwaras/NGOs and observed that position was little different in those I managed to get access to Fin statements. I USED TO TAKE UP THE CASES ON DIRECT BASIS but sadly there was little change or difference in quality of Fin management.

    My total experience was summarised in my article written about 15 years and then the revised version was published in MS.

    I continue to raise the subject where and when I can. I am not selectively forgetful or oblivion of facts and am aware of the role and powers of MGC but as the central body it can lead by example and then urge others.
    Just for information the silence of individual Sanggat professionals and their lack of voicing or action may be contributing factors to the perceived ongoing of suspected cases of any MISMANAGEMENT AND LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND WEAK or NON-EXISTENT MONITORING OF MANAGEMENT OF TRUST FUNDS OF GURDWARAS AND NGOs.

    This is an international culture as is evidenced by reports of TI – ACFE – OTHER SURVEYS AVAILABLE ON INTERNET.

  2. Sr Gursharan Singh seems to gallopping into a altogether a different direction,having lost the main core issues in MGC’s response to an all together and entirely another subject..

    It is noticed he did the same in the article,by the Gurduara Commitee regards the Melaka event.

    He was keenly trying to blame the lack of transparency by individual Gurduara comitees upon the MGC,very coyly.

    Sr Gursharan Singh seems to be selectively forgetful and oblivion to the facts that MGC is only a guiding body,and a central body that has guided in the panthic maryada,and suportted the gurduaras in Malaysia,in addition to guiding and representing many other Sikh interests of the community.

    The MGC has no statutory powers to enforce what Mr Gursharan Singh insisting on.

    Every gurduara committee is otherwise quite semi autonomous in how they account to the local sangat that elected them .

    No doubt,Mr Gursharan Singh’s suggestion is a good practice ,transparency and acountablity is very much an alien culture to most Sikh organisations.

    Thus it is the gurduaras that Sr Gursharan Singh should b chasing after.

    The state of affairs in a gurduara in UK that has been mentioned is a very tiny tip of the greater iceberg,nor that it has any relational bearing on Sikh gurduaras in Malaysia,nor should we emulate their actions.

    I would ask and support Sr Gursharan Singh to address this issue,which appears to b very dear to his heart rightfully.and should be so with every Sikh to the individual gurduaras.

  3. I have little if not nil knowledge on Sikhi matters and thus will not comment on the ongoing divisive debate on DG and other Sikhi related matters.
    My main concern is lack of TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ON FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT MATTERS as almost NON OF TAE GURDWARAS/SIKH NGOs MAKE PUBLIC THEIR AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS with the reason that only MEMBERS ARE ENTITLED TO THE FINANCIAL AND MANAGEMENT MATTERS AS IS PROVIDED BY THEIR RESPECTIVE BY-LAWS. Many MGC of Gurdwaras/NGOs seek donations from Sanggat/public but never say that they cannot take donations from the non-members.
    This may be a double standard like the wife telling the husband YOUR MONEY IS MY MONEY AND MY MONEY IS MY MONEY [here the wife may be equated to the Mgt Ctee of Gurdwaras/NGOs]
    Due to lack of Transparency there may be general perception that Trust Funds of Gurdwaras/NGOs may be subject to Mismanagement and/or Fraud. The only solution is for the Gurdwaras/NGOs including the controlling bodies to make their AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TO BE PUBLISHED in websites like ASIA SAMACHAR for all the Sanggat to see. Controlling bodies such as the MGCouncil/SWAN/SNSM to lead the way.
    The laws prescribe minimum safeguards and none of them prohibit the Financial Statement from being published for all to see.
    There was little if not any response to my article on TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF GURDWARAS/NGOs FUNDS which was published in the ASIA SAMACHAR [on 14.2.16] and thus this lack of response may further confirm the perception among the Sanggatg members that there may be financial MISMANAGEMENT AND POSSIBLE FRAUD which may have been concealed.
    International Fraud Surveys have shown that RELIGIOUS/NGOs TRUST FUNDS are among the most susceptible to FRAUD AND MISMANAGEMENT.

    As examples following reports are reproduced:
    [a]The Guru Nanak Gurdwara in Sedgley Street, Blakenhall, is at the centre of a power struggle between temple elders and the 25-member committee which oversees day-to-day operations. The trustees want the committee to stand down en masse after the Charity Commission expressed concerns over how they were elected. The row went to court last year, resulting in an order barring any withdrawals from the temple’s account until the dispute had been resolved. Now trustees say that £126,000 that should have been paid into the account between November 6 and February 21 has been left unaccounted for. One of the trustees, Sukhbinder Singh Sandhu, said: “We simply want to know where the money has gone. “Thousands of pounds is taken each week at the Gurdwara in donations yet for months not a penny was paid into the official account. [Read more at
    [b] When cardinals elected Pope Francis in 2013, he was given a mandate to eliminate cronyism, inefficiency and corruption in the Vatican. The Wall Street Journal reported Sept. 7 that Pope Francis has trimmed the powers of Cardinal George Pell, who was charged with cleaning up the city-state’s muddled accounts, in a setback for broader overhaul of Vatican bureaucracy. Late last year, Pell hired PricewaterhouseCoopers to undertake a comprehensive audit of the Vatican’s finances. Accounting at the Vatican has never followed unified policies, according to the WSJ article. Annual reports aren’t released, different departments use different accounting principles, data are inconsistent and not comparable. Before Cardinal Pell’s appointment, a panel of cardinals charged with economic oversight met just twice a year. Budgets didn’t exist, and expenditures weren’t itemized. Already Pell had found about $1.6 billion “tucked away” off the books.
    Other officials, led by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Secretary of State, known as the pope’s prime minister, let Pell know the audit wouldn’t fly. In June, the Vatican announced it had been scrapped, and soon many of Cardinal Pell’s wide-ranging powers were handed to others.
    [The whole article is available to WSJ subscribers here:

    Similar possible fraud/mismanagement of religious organizations/NGOs funds can be accessed from the internet. The status or education level of the members of the Mgt Ctee Members may not be any guarantee of they being honest-ethical or with integrity.

    Gur Fateh