SAN JOSE, California, USA—It was 2:30 AM, the night before the Sarbat Khalsa 2015. Kulwinder Singh and four others had been gambling on the balcony of a house in Batala, Punjab. A gang of six men approached them. According to a first information report (FIR) in Batala police records, one of the men carried a daatr, or a sickle-like tool, probably the length of a sword—sometimes used to harvest crops, sometimes to kill. At least one of the others carried a pistol. Give us everything you have, they said. The man with the daatr swung the blunt end at Kulwinder Singh’s waist. Kulwinder Singh had 25,000 rupees. Some of the other men had cellphones. The gang of six men took the money and the phones and left—five gunshots ringing in their wake.
What happened after is disputed. There are two different versions of the story. The Punjab Police’s version is that after the six men left, they were sheltered by a U.S. citizen named Bhupinder Singh Cheema who was staying in Kala Afghana, a village 20 km away from where the robbery took place. It was Cheema’s first visit to Punjab in three years. This version of the story, recorded in an amended FIR, resulted in Cheema being charged with Section 216 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for “harboring offenders.” This was one of 16 potential criminal violations he was charged with during his visit, one of three different criminal cases he was implicated in, turning what was supposed to be a quick visit to India into a three month stint in jail, costing almost 60,000 dollars, and resulting in him returning home only to realize that he may not be able to return to his village or his land ever again.
In the alternative version of the story, Cheema’s version, he didn’t shelter the robbers. He didn’t even know these men, had never met them in his life. In fact, later that same day he was in village Chabba, near Amritsar, attending the Sarbat Khalsa, a mass congregation of over half a million Sikhs called to assert Sikh sovereignty and determine the future of the Sikh community. Cheema says that this false case, in addition to two others, were planted on him by the Punjab police to harass him because he attended the Sarbat Khalsa and because his family is affiliated with the opposing political party, Shiromani Akali Dal (Amritsar). Most importantly however, he believes this was done by the Punjab government to send the message to the Sikh diaspora that: if you speak up against us, we will silence you.
If Cheema truly is the prey of the Punjab police in all of this, if he’s truly been skewered by the state, then this fate must be squared with his privileged status as a U.S. citizen. Even in a country with history of committing violence against Sikhs, there’s a certain kind of weight, a dominance, an influence attached to the blue eagled passport that can’t be ignored, isn’t there?
The U.S. Embassy: Facilities or Formalities?
In the year 2014, the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs made 8,685 visits to arrested U.S. citizens in prisons around the world. According to the U.S. Department of State, roughly 30 million U.S. citizens travel overseas each year, this means that less than 1% of citizens traveling abroad are arrested and imprisoned. However, this figure does not account for the people who are arrested, but not visited by U.S. embassies, mainly because the U.S. doesn’t know about them.
Article 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations outlines the rules regarding communication between countries in the case of arrest—the visited country’s authorities are only required to inform the home country, if the arrested citizen requests it. In other words, if you are a foreigner arrested in India, Indian authorities are not required to inform your home country’s consulate, unless you specifically request it. It is often said that the first thing you should do if you are arrested abroad is tell the police to contact your country’s embassy immediately.
Two consular officers from the U.S. Embassy visited Cheema in Gurdaspur Central Jail on December 21, 2015, one month after his arrest. A state department official said, “We were able to visit Mr. Singh in prison on December 21, 2015, and provide all appropriate consular services. He registered no formal complaints of his treatment.” Cheema, however, said he has many complaints.
He said that when the embassy representatives came to visit him, they gave him some pamphlets and a list of attorneys, but couldn’t support him financially or legally in a substantive way. “The embassy doesn’t have facilities, they just have formalities,” Cheema said. “They met me on December 21 and after that they never visited me again. I said many times that I wanted to meet them.” Cheema also asked them if they could get the India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the cases against him, but he never heard back. “I thought the U.S. had a name, but the U.S. didn’t even do an investigation,” he said.
The website of the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi states that the embassy cannot “get you out of jail” or “pay your legal fees,” which explains why Cheema felt its limitations so palpably. It also may not be feasible for the U.S. embassy to influence another country to open an investigation on petty crime charges against one individual. However, there maybe some truth to Cheema’s claims that the embassy should have done more.
The embassy is supposed to, “work with local authorities to ensure that your rights under Indian law are fully observed, [including] protesting any mistreatment or abuse.” While Cheema does not claim that he was abused in jail, he is saying that he was jailed on completely false charges—could this be considered mistreatment? A state department official also said that, “Consular officers work to ensure that detained or incarcerated U.S. citizens receive a fair and speedy trial with the benefit of counsel, in accordance with local and international law.”
The officers of the embassy are supposed to “work” with local authorities and the detained citizen during their incarceration, however in Cheema’s case, after they visited him once on December 21st, he claims he never heard from them again. He was not released until over two months later, on February 26th. During those two months, they didn’t communicate with him at all, didn’t visit him again, despite his attempts to contact them. It doesn’t exactly seem likely then, that the embassy could ensure a “fair” or “speedy” trial.
The Charges Against Cheema
One early November morning at around 6 AM, about 30 police officers showed up at Bhupinder Singh Cheema’s house in Kala Afghana, district Gurdaspur. It was November 21, almost one month after he had landed in India and 11 days after he was seen at the Sarbat Khalsa. He had spent the past few days shopping in Amritsar and planting wheat on his farmland. When the police showed up, he had just taken a shower and wasn’t properly dressed. He says the police asked him if he wanted to finish getting ready. He said no, and that he hadn’t done anything. They told him they weren’t sure about that, but he had to come with them. He says he did not resist the arrest because he wasn’t afraid. He knew he was innocent. When Cheema sat in the car, he asked one police officer why they were arresting him. According to Cheema, the officer said he didn’t know and that they had no FIR against him. They had nothing.
Initially, Cheema was not charged with harboring thieves, in fact he was not really charged at all. According to Batala police records, Cheema was arrested under Sections 107, 108, and 151 of India’s Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC). Respectively, these sections allow the police to fine anyone who they think might “disturb the peace,” anyone who is “disseminating seditious matters,” and finally arrest anyone who they think might commit a crime. This means, that in Punjab, you actually don’t even need to commit a crime to be arrested.
Apparently, for Cheema, the only proof of his “criminal activity” thus far, seems to be that he was sighted at the Sarbat Khalsa, sitting on stage cross legged, two to three rows from the front. Gurvinder Singh, another attendee of Sarbat Khalsa, who is a light rail operator in San Jose, saw him there and also said that his name was announced, but that he was not involved as an organizer at all in relation to the event.
But Cheema’s charge sheet tells another story. One paragraph long, it repeats itself multiple times, it states that Cheema was saying, “inciting things to incite people” and “disturbing the peace” by speaking at the Sarbat Khalsa. Apparently, someone who saw Cheema inciting the masses allegedly asked him who he was, and Cheema revealed his identity to the person, who then reported it to Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) Harjit Singh of Fatehgarh Churiyan Police Station.
One of the laws Cheema was arrested under, Section 108, was instituted in 1860, during British rule of India. In fact, it was probably initially used to jail freedom fighters who were distributing seditious pamphlets and literature, and making speeches against the British. The irony is that the Punjab government owes its existence to those who fought to free India from the iron shackles of British rule, but it is using the very same iron to shackle its citizens today. One hundred years ago, Ghadris were being arrested under sedition laws, now Sarbat Khalsa participants are.
Pulling Strings for Cheema’s Release, Or Not
When Bhupinder Singh Cheema exited Gurdaspur Central Jail on January 9, 49 days after his initial arrest, his attorney and some members of the press stood waiting. Cheema had finally been granted bail for his initial arrest for “disturbing the peace” following Sarbat Khalsa. He said that the second he stepped out, before he had even reached the main entrance gate, the police were waiting for him. They re-arrested him. Allegedly, they told the members of the press to put down their cameras and confiscated some of their cell phones. He said they took him to a private car. There were four people sitting in it and they told him he would have to see the Senior Superintendent of Batala Police (SSP Batala), Harjinder Singh Dhillon. He said they told him that the SSP had already decided by then, to charge him with robbery.
Cheema’s re-arrest was recorded by the CCTV cameras at Gurdaspur Jail. Cheema’s lawyer, Simranjit Singh, requested the camera footage to be presented before the judge in a petition, however, it has not yet been presented. After his re-arrest, Cheema would spend at least 45 more days before being released on bail again, this time without being re-arrested. Following his re-arrest, the police implicated him in a third FIR, which detailed another “disturbing of the peace” incident at Harimandar Sahib, following the Sarbat Khalsa. According to Simranjit Singh, none of the charges against him have yet been dismissed. “I am afraid if I go back they will put more false cases on me,” said Cheema, “There’s no freedom there. You can’t speak the truth.”
While Cheema was being carted around to different police stations, listening to the stories of the incarcerated men in his jail locked up for 16 hours a day, many of his friends were trying desperately to help him get out. They were pulling strings in their personal networks, emailing political officials when they could, writing press releases. Gurinder Dhillon, a friend of Cheema’s who works in business management at a Silicon Valley tech company, reached out to the U.S. embassy and to the mayor of San Jose, Sam Liccardo. In an email dated, January 15, the mayor’s policy advisor, Paul Pereira said he would contact U.S. congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (representing San Jose and surrounding cities), the U.S. Department of State, and Amnesty International about Cheema’s case. On January 12, Mayor Liccardo wrote that he would even be willing to join a protest on behalf of Cheema. The mayor’s office did not respond to further questions regarding whether or not they had followed through with any of their promises.
On September 24, when the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi came to visit San Jose, Mayor Liccardo was reported saying, “We welcome the leader of the biggest democracy on the planet. We are proud to be the location where Modi has chosen to address the community.” Given this support of Modi, how willing would the mayor be to advocate on behalf of Sikh-Americans unjustly detained by the Punjab government? The Mayor’s office did not respond to questions regarding this matter.
As an alternative to local government, another solution to Cheema’s troubles could have come through local gurdwara leaders. After all, if the cases planted on Cheema are truly false, as he claims, then it would seem that political pressure from the government was the reason for his jail time. Perhaps, with pressure in the opposite direction, results could be reversed. Two members of the San Jose Gurdwara Committee, Pritam Singh Grewal and Sarbjot Singh Sawaddi, occupy leadership positions on the Shiromani Akali Dal Badal Party of the U.S., appointed by Deputy Chief MInister, Sukhbir Badal himself. Cheema, who is a registered member of San Jose Gurdwara, has made allegations that they may have had something to do with his arrest, due to tense past relationships with them. When asked whether they had anything to say about this matter, they did not respond.
The Implications: Could this happen to anyone?
Cheema’s story is complex, yet revealing. In a way, it is the story of being abandoned by both of the countries you called home, being denied justice by the supposed “justice system” in what is supposedly the “largest democracy in the world,” being neglected by the government agencies of the “land of the free” as you’re denied freedom—being in a chronic, catatonic state of uncertainty about who you can trust, what can happen to you, and where you can call home. Such stories make you wonder: is Punjab being run by a government, or a gang? Are we in fact minor to America, because we’re a minority?
“This can happen to anyone. This has proven it,” said Gurinder Dhillon. “No one is now safe. Imagine you’re going to Shaheedi Jorh Mela and you sit on a stage and tomorrow you become a target.” Perhaps this is paranoia, fed by a tumultuous recent past of encounters and police murders and sacrilege and corruption, or perhaps it isn’t. Maybe the Punjab government wants the diaspora to think twice about visiting Punjab. Maybe Cheema’s detainment was to set an example, like cutting a finger off of a hostage and mailing it to their family, with a note: if you don’t give us what we want, next time it will be worse. After all, no one will speak up if they’ll be punished by having their tongue cut out.
For police one will need to have Police reforms.
Nations are made and destroyed by Empires.
India is not a Empire.
Ranjit Singh Kingdom was destroyed in the Anglo-Sikh wars . It has gone with the wind.
What is left of it now is CM Badal , King Amrinder an people of Punjab.
As for state sanctioned murder just win the elections and convert the state of you Dreams .
Ranjit Singh Kingdom had several weakness that is why it fell.
Let me explain (for the umpteenth time) to you that you have a completely cock-eyed and prejudiced regard for historical facts. (1) The Khalsa Raj of Maharajah Ranjit Singh was not dismantled in ‘Anglo-Sikh War’ (sic) (actually there were two of these) but by the treachery of the Dogra brothers Dhian Singh (Vizier) and Gholab Singh (rewarded for his traitorous collaboration by the East India Company by being given the Rajaship of Kashmir which has led to the anomaly of a Hindu Raja overlording a predominantly Muslim state). These two Hindu Dogra traitors may have hastened Maharajah Ranjit Singh’s death (there is a suggestion that he was poisoned) and acted on the behalf of the EIC promising the co-operation of their commanders in the field and all battle plans recruiting two particular ‘Sikh’ generals Tej Singh & Lal Singh to betray the Sikh Empire and working their way through Ranjit’s successors (Kharak Singh was probably also poisoned and Dhian’s Singh hand is bloodstained with the murder of the grandson Nau Nihal Singh in particular). Their treachery was absolutely vital in the loss of the first Anglo Sikh War when EIC’s General Gough was on the point of defeat at the battle of Mudki (and was in the midst of burning all his papers in his tent so convinced was he of defeat) when the Dogras, Tej and Lal Singh withheld supplies and refrained from joining the attack. The lesson to be learned is that the ‘Empire’ did not win by annexation but by the infiltration of traitors and collaborators within the Sikh Empire – sound familiar today?
The EIC did not ‘invade’ the Sikh Empire. They had a treaty with Ranjit Singh to stop him moving southwards over the Sutlej and threaten the rest of India which was under their control. They made this treaty because Ranjit SIngh’s Khalsa Raj was too formidable an opponent to take on in the field as the Khalsa army was undefeated against the Moghul and the Afghan and had also been versed in European soldiery through the employment of Napoleon’s ex-generals. The treaty ensured that Ranjit would not impinge upin British rule in the rest of the subcontinent and allowe them to buy time to find another way to subvert the Sikh Empire. This they did by finding men who were prepared to commit treason (although even they did not have the courage to commit such treachery whilst Ranjit was actually alive). The crucial traitors were the Hindu Dogra brothers Dhian and Gulab who both enjoyed enormous patronage and trust in Ranjit’s court being his most senior ministers. Without their treachery there was no possibility or even an attempt at invading Sikh territory to be made by the EIC in the decades of Ranjit’s rule. Once it became clear Ranjit was dying the Dogras signed on the dotted line (assuring the EIC full co-operation of their corrupted commanders and battle plans in the field) the EIC was emboldened enough to begin minor raids and skirmishes on the Sikh empire’s border. The plan was to provoke the Khalsa army by occupying land on the south bank of the Sutlej – which was part of the SIkh Empire’s terriory. This deliberate provocation by the EIC was only done after the Dogras had co-opted fellow traitors Tej and Lal Singh (Generals of the Sikh army) to provide both battle plans and assurances of military support e.g. withdrawing their troops at crucial moments, failing to resupply etc. without the Dogras as lynchpin there was no way the EIC was going to engage with the Khalsa army, the Dogras treason was absolutely crucial and even after the first anglo-Sikh war (won by the skin of the teeth and treachery of Lal and Tej) the EIC’s treaty was not of conquest but of limited occupation as its terms stated they were staying in the SIkh kingdom only so long as the child Maharajah Duleep Singh came of age. The annexation occurred after the second Anglo Sikh war when the EIC had effectively disarmed the Khalsa army. The fundamental role of the Dogra brothers is extremely well documented not least the reward given to Gulab Dogra by the East India Company (which was a private company acting as a proxy for the British Government rather than British Empire) of the Rajaship of Kashmir in payment for his treachery. The EIC had a treaty with Ranjit SIngh and did not dare attack his Sikh Empire whilst he was alive as the Dogras were not prepared to betray Ranjit whilst he lived such was their fear of him.
Punjab has become maligned in India by the Bhinderwla-Indira Punjab period of 1980-1990.
It will take a long time to close that chapter and move on with life.
In the mean time we need to build multiple new Punjab’s which we can call home.
It is sad to leave behind so much of history behind to write new histories in this and parallel Universes.
Punjab has become maligned by corrupted Punjab police and the sanctioning of extra judicial powers to them which they have used like a drunk would use a back-door key to a brewery to intoxicate themselves. Problem in Punjab goes back to 1947 and the refusal of Indian Sarkar to honour promises it made to Sikhs to induce them to join in India rather than reform their own sovereign country in the mold of Ranjit Singh’s Khalsa Raj SIkh empire. Sikh grievances were detailed in the Anandpur Sahib Resolutions decades before the 1980 -1990 period and again you have ‘conveniently’ forgotten the state sanctioned murder of Sikhs in 1978 in Amritsar.
Yes Harinder it is so sad, sad when the leaders are ones illegally erasing history themselves. And of course this cannot happen without mass human rights violations. And yes you are right that it will take a long time to close that chapter and move on, because there hasn’t been any justice delivered to all the human rights violations that have occurred in the past and the ones happening still today. Did you know that in 2016, the acche din wala era, international human rights organizations are not allowed to enter “hindu”stan? Is it possible india is hiding something?? Hmmmm, I wonder….
Yes Harinder it is so sad, sad when the leaders are ones illegally erasing history themselves. And of course this cannot happen without mass human rights violations. And yes you are right that it will take a long time to close that chapter and move on, because there hasn’t been any justice delivered to all the human rights violations that have occurred in the past and the ones happening still today. Did you know that in 2016, the acche din wala era, international human rights organizations are not allowed to enter “hindu”stan? Is it possible india is hiding something?? Hmmmm, I wonder….