Preacher Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale appeared before Sri Akal Takth Sahib, ‘fall in line’ after meeting with high priests
Kanwar Inder Singh/royalpatiala.in News/ May 21,2025
Today, preacher Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale appeared before the five priests at Sri Akal Takht Sahib, after incumbent acting jathedar of the highest Sikh temporal seat Giani Kuldeep Singh Gargaj had invited him to rejoin the Sikh fold by appearing before the Takht with clarification.
After appearing before the Sikh’s highest temporal seat, Dhadrianwale accepted his mistakes done in the past. Later the jathedars accepted his apology and pronounced their decision and allowed to preacher Dhadrianwale to rejoin the Sikh fold, to do Sikh preaching’s.
Nearly five years after the Akal Takht asked Sikhs to boycott the discourses of preacher Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale for his controversial utterances on the Sikh principles and traditions, he is back in Sikh fold.
On August 24, 2020, the then Sikh clergy directed the community to boycott his discourses until he does not appear before it to apologize for his remarks termed as “objectionable” by a considerable section of the Sikhs, considering the report of the sub-committee constituted to probe the statements of Dhadrianwale. “The community is directed to not organize his congregation, listen to him and share his video on social media, until he does not apologize appearing at Sri Akal Takht Sahib for his objectionable remarks,” reads the edict of the Sikh clergy.
Preacher Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale appeared before Sri Akal Takth Sahib, ‘fall in line’ after meeting with high priests. Recently the Patiala Police has recommended the cancellation of FIT registered against him on charges of sexual assault and murder. A three-member Patiala police special investigation team (SIT) formed to look into the allegations has recommended “cancellation of the FIR”.
The FIR was lodged at the Passiana police station in Patiala on December 7, 2024, under Sections 302 (murder), 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC against him.
