Indian Constitution; Akali members refuse to sign

Who: Constituent Assembly of India (its president was Dr. Rajendra Prasad; its Drafting Committee was chaired by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar). The Sikh members who refused to sign were Sardar Hukam Singh (future Speaker of the Lok Sabha) and Sardar Bhupinder Singh Mann, both Akali members; the sources consulted name no other Sikh member as having refused.

What: The Constituent Assembly adopted the Indian Constitution on November 26, 1949, its members signed it on January 24, 1950, and it came into effect on January 26, 1950 (Republic Day). The Tribune (2016) says 284 members signed; Wikipedia gives the Assembly 299 members and calls the Constitution "signed and accepted by all". The sources opened do not say who the others were or why they did not sign, apart from the two Akali members below. Key provisions affecting Sikhs:

• Article 25(2)(b): Provides for "throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character" to all classes of Hindus. Crucially, the Explanation attached classified Sikhs, Jains, and Buddhists as "Hindus" for purposes of this article, a classification the Sikh community categorically rejected as conflating religious identity.
• Article 72: Presidential clemency power (later relevant to Bandi Singhs cases).
• Article 161: Gubernatorial clemency power.
• Article 25 generally: religious freedom guarantees.
• Article 29 and 30: minority cultural and educational rights.

Sikh constitutional representatives' position: In his final speech in the Assembly in 1949, Sardar Hukam Singh said, "My community can not subscribe its assent to this historic document" (Gurmukh Singh, Asia Samachar). The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism says that, failing to win protection for Sikhs as a religious minority, he refused to sign the Constitution as a member. Tarlochan Singh writes that the other Akali member, Bhupinder Singh Mann, followed him, and Hardev Singh Virk calls them the two Sikh members who did not sign, in protest at the absence of guarantees for Sikhs that Congress leaders had promised. Gurmukh Singh singles out Explanation II to Article 25, which reads references to Hindus as including Sikhs, as the clause that offends Sikh sentiment. The 1973 Anandpur Sahib Resolution, as the Encyclopaedia of Sikhism reports it, says that the Sikh representatives in the Constituent Assembly "refused to affix their signatures".

Where: New Delhi.

Why it mattered: The constitutional classification of Sikhs as "Hindus" for Article 25(2)(b) purposes became one of the foundational constitutional grievances driving subsequent Panthic political demands. The 1973 Anandpur Sahib Resolution, as the Encyclopaedia of Sikhism reports it, says a "brute majority" imposed the Constitution in 1950; it does not name Article 25. Gurmukh Singh was still arguing against Explanation II in 2019 and 2025 (below). The refusal of the two Akali members to sign set a precedent of Panthic constitutional dissent within the Indian federal framework.

The "Sikhs are not Hindus" constitutional argument: Gurmukh Singh OBE writes in Asia Samachar that Explanation II groups Sikhs with Hindus, which he calls "obnoxious discrimination", and that Sikhism should be seen as "one among many religions of India, not as one part among the many parts of Hinduism". He says the Sikh Core Group wanted the word "Sikh" removed from the Explanation. He also quotes the Supreme Court's 2005 remark that Sikhs and Jains "have throughout been treated as part of the wider Hindu community". The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (set up in 2000, reported in March 2002) recommended omitting Explanation II and rewording clause (2)(b) to name Hindu, Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religious institutions separately.