Jump to content

Neo-Masand propaganda against Sants


Xylitol

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

shaheediya:

Its interesting to hear what they have to say. we might not agree with it but its still interesting to hear their view point..i hope he is not banned from this site so that we turn this into sikhsangat2..

Charitro pakhyan was ended around 1696 i think and bachitar natak around 1692. im not sure though but i think the dates are given within the various avatar sakhis.

i'll let someone else answer your remaining questions

Link to post
Share on other sites

i hope he is not banned from this site so that we turn this into sikhsangat2..

He won't be banned from this website, as website doesn't allow any kind of censorship as long as its within gurmat framework/gurmat sidhant. Obviously, bold one liner statements without any source is discouraged and may be set for approval in que until source is provided or logic behind it its explained.

I personally don't agree with kala afghana bhausaria ideology one bit, even created a thread with compilation of their flawed approaches/mindset in the past . I would rather see them being challenged/debated by saints/scholars of the panth than simply having knee jerk reactions to their posts or simply having an attitude of passing fatwas against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't be banned from this website, as website doesn't allow any kind of censorship as long as its within gurmat framework/gurmat sidhant . (I appreciate your committment to keep this truly an open forum. The sole purpose of my postings was not to create a division among Sikhs but to unite us all under One Panth & One Granth concept and create a constructive atmosphere to base our views on Gurbani and Gurbani alone) Obviously, bold one liner statements without any source is discouraged and may be set for approval in que until source is provided or logic behind it its explained.

I personally don't agree with kala afghana bhausaria ideology one bit, even created a thread with compilation of their flawed approaches/mindset in the past . I would rather see them being challenged/debated by saints/scholars of the panth than simply having knee jerk reactions to their posts or simply having an attitude of passing fatwas against them. (If we ALL kept this mind set, I am absolutely sure that within a few months the Khalsa Panth can take care majority of the issues we currently face and spread Shabad Gurbani all over the world.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, Afghanas.

Lets invite some Minas, Masands, Dhir Malias and Ram Raiyas.

Have real ball!

When we have Sri Guru Grath Sahib ji, we do not need anybody else to teach us. The rest just fades away ! Nothing can stand against the teachings of Gurbani and scientific and logical conclusions provided by our Guru ji. All I ask is that we read every single word of Gurbani at a time and find the true meaning of it, as Guru ji meant for us ! Guru ji never even mocked or taunted the enemies of Sikhs. Prime examples of Pande Khan against Guru Hargobind Sahib ji, Raja Hari Chand against Guru Gobind Singh in Bhangani battle and many more

Link to post
Share on other sites

Khalsa ji,

These were long posts. Forgive me if I missed the answers.

1. What do KalaAfghanis say about Jap Sahib? Do they consider it Bani of Tenth Master?

2. Isn't Maha Kaal and Akaal are Sargun and Nirgun aspects of Creator? One aspect for soldier and another for saint.

Nirgun expands to Sargun. Being saint is pre-requisite to be a perfect saint-soldier khalsa. Two granths but Guru is Adi Granth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your reason for reading Afgana's books if all we need is Guru Sahib? Or, for Sikhs, why do we need to read Bhai Gurdas' vaaran? or go to school?

Nobody has ever said that Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not Guru.

(PS: if you bother to read Chaupai Sahib, the date is in there.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gur Da Sikh:

I appreciate your committment to keep this truly an open forum. The sole purpose of my postings was not to create a division among Sikhs but to unite us all under One Panth & One Granth concept and create a constructive atmosphere to base our views on Gurbani and Gurbani alone

You say one Panth one Granth. Why cant you follow three Granths as one Guru, there of the same light. Its like saying all our 10 Human Gurus' are different and now useless because we have Guru Granth Sahib now? Try to open your mind. Ignore what some people may have you believe is true, because what they say may not be true also. The middle way is always the best way, you'll understand the world from all angles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad that the JUICY stuff that you are looking for only exists in Charitro Pakhyan, (about 30% ) of Dasam Granth

(Only a dirty mind of a Kala Afghanist would consider Chatro Pakhyan as juicy.)

Read Gurbani carefully you will find that Gurbani's message is to prevent us from wrong doing by providing GIAN which you are so violently opposed to

Prevent us from doing wrong right? You guys have reduced Sikhi to a religion of moral and ethical rules! You can find these moral rules in every religion in the world. Most Athiests are moralists, what need is there for a person to embrace Sikhi above other religions and ways of life it it is just about morality and ethics??

Naam is Hukam (Gurbani's Message) & Simran originates from Sanskrit meaning Rememberance, Hence remembering God and Gurbani message at all times is actually Naam Simran.

But HOW do you remember Vaheguru? It is through doing Simran/Zikr of Parmatma’s divine name. You Kala Afghanists claim to be Singh Sabhiyas. Since the current Sikh rehet Maryadha was written by the Singh Sabhiyas and supported by vidhvaans like Sahib Singh, then why don’t you follow the SRM where it says: in Chapter III: A Sikh should wake up in the ambrosial hours (three hours before the dawn), take bath and, concentrating his/her thoughts on One Immortal Being, repeat the name Waheguru. For furthur info please read Prof Sahib Singh’s book Simran Dhiyan barkataan about the importance of Vaheguru Simran.

show me where its written in Hindu Vedas or Shastars or anywhere else

If you had cared to have read Gurbani, you would have come accross the Tukh in Anand Sahib, Simrat Shastar punn paap bichardhe that the Simratees and Shastars do veechar on punn and paap. All religions tell you not to lie cheat, kill etc. Atheists follow such morality as well. Sikhi is a roohani marg, prema Bhagti marg, not a religion obsessed with punn and paap like the semitic religions of the middle east.

Explain to me why in the so called Bachitar Natak, there is no refernce to Pir Budhu Shah`s sacrifices of 700 disciples, no mention of Chamkaur di Garhi, Martyrdom of all four Sahibzadas, and most importantly the `Creation of Khalsa in 1699` and no mention of why Guru ji told us to follow Guru Granth Sahib ji as the Only Guru, and any mention of the original Panj Payres, Mata Gujri ji. Yet this is supposed to be his Autobiography. Wake up and ask yourself why you do the ardaas and say Guru Manyo Granth and follow two Gurus

Sant Sipahi magazine answer this question most beautifully:

Question. If Bachittar Natak is the autobiography of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then why there is no mention of Vaisakhi 1699 (Amirt Sanskar), battle of Chamkaur Sahib, and martyrdom of the younger Sahibzades?

Answer. This is an amusing question.

Bachittar Natak is a voluminous work and includes Apni Katha, the autobiography of Guru Gobind Singh ji. This is the fifth composition in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib.

Sri Dasam Granth Sahib has fifteen compositions. The first is Jaapu Sahib and the last is Zafarnamah. Except for the Zafarnamah, the letter written to Aurangzeb, the rest of the compositions were completed by 1696 A.D. (bikrami 1753).

It was a brilliant idea to record the date, time, place and year of the completion of this work. This is evident from the closing lines of Chritropakhyan, the fourteenth composition. It says:

“On the banks of river Satluj the granth was completed on Sunday, Bhadro Sudi Eighth 1753 bikrami (1696 A.D). This closes the dialogue between the King and his ministers and with this the four hundred and four episodes come to a good end”.

ਸੰਬਤ ਸਤ੍ਰਹ ਸਹਸ ਭਣਿਜੈ। ਅਰਧ ਸਹਸ ਫੁਨਿ ਤੀਨਿ ਕਹਿਜੈ।।

ਭਾਦ੍ਰਵ ਸੁਦੀ ਅਸਟਮੀ ਰਵਿ ਵਾਰਾ। ਤੀਰ ਸਤੁਦ੍ਰਵ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੁਧਾਰਾ।।405।।

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਪਖਯਾਨੇ ਤਿਆ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰੇ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੀ ਭੂਪ ਸੰਪਾਦੇ

ਚਾਰ ਸੌ ਚਾਰ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਸਮਾਪਤ ਸਤੁ ਸੁਭਮ ਸਤੁ।।404।।7555।।ਅਫਜੂੰ।।

Autobiography, unlike biography is obviously written during the lifetime of the author and has the incidents mentioned up to that period of time.

Now the Order of the Khalsa was initiated on Vaisakhi, 1699 A.D. (1756 b.) and Sri Dasam Granth was completed three years earlier, in 1696 A.D. (1753 b.)

Battle of Chamkaur Sahib was fought on 7 Poh, Samvat 1761 (1704 A.D.) and younger Sahibzadas of Guru Gobind Singh ji attained martyrdom during this period.

It is thus obvious that the autography penned by Guru Gobind Singh ji years ahead could not include the events and incidents that took place later on.

I wonder why there are cases of Rapes at Deras & Nanaksariye Thaths, Oh ya, these people read the Charitro Pakhyan in Dasam Granth. See if you can read the translation of this so called Dasam Bani to your mom & sisters
You should ask this to your Kala Afghana Sahib and his pedophile ways, you guys follow a sexual preditor:

Indexed as: Khalsa v. Bhullar

Between Gurbaksh Singh Khalsa, Plaintiff, and Taranjit

Kaur Bhullar, Harinder Singh Bhullar, Gurnam Singh

Bajwa and Kahar Singh Pannu, Defendants

Counsel for the Plaintiff: Douglas S. Cunliffe.

Counsel for the Defendants: Christopher M. Considine.

[1992] B.C.J. No. 378 Victoria Registry No. 89/1983

British Columbia Supreme Court Victoria, British

Columbia

Macdonell J.

Heard: September 3 - 6, 9 - 12 and November 7, 1991

Judgment: February 24, 1992 (15 pp.)

Torts - Defamation 2- Defences - Truth. Sexual assault

- Damages - General

damages - Punitive damages - Punitive damage award

appropriate where a

/1 priest of the Sikh religion breached his position

of trust by sexually assaulting a

parishioner.

The plaintiff sued for damages for defamation of

character. The defendants counterclaimed for damages

for sexual assault. The plaintiff was a priest of a

Sikh religious temple. The summer following the

incident which was the subject of this lawsuit, the

plaintiff was discharged. The plaintiff was

68-years-old, and resided in the living quarters with

his wife and a daughter. His argument was that a

faction in the temple wanted to get rid of him, so

they attempted to put him in a compromising position

with Mrs. B. He claimed that she wrongfully exposed

herself before him and was sexually aggressive towards

him, and that he took no part in it. He further argued

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further

employment as a priest. The case for the defence was

that the plaintiff was not defamed and that, in fact,

the allegation of sexual assault was true.

HELD: The plaintiffs action was dismissed. The

defendant Mrs. B succeeded on her counterclaim, having

proved that the plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted

her. The court awarded her $5,000.00 in general

damages, and $5,000.00 in special damages. The

plaintiff had failed to prove his allegation of a

wrongful accusation of sexual assault. The defendants

had proved their counterclaim AND THE COURT FOUND THAT

IN FACT THE SEXUAL ASSAULT HAD TAKEN PLACE. With

respect to general damages for the sexual assault, the

court had to bear in mind the gravity of the assault,

the circumstances of it, and its effect on Mrs. B. The

assault was of a relatively minor nature in the sense

that there was only one incident. The assault here was

committed by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest. The emotional impact of the forceful

touching of the plaintiffs chest and the attempt to

remove her stockings was not only offensive but

appalling, particularly as the priest in the Sikh

religion is held in high esteem and the utmost in

decorum is expected of him. He was in a position of

trust and abused the trust. On the other hand, there

did not appear to be any serious after-effects on Mrs.

B other than distaste for the whole matter. The impact

on Mrs. B would be lessened by her vindication in this

lawsuit, allowing her to save face.

MACDONELL J.:- The plaintiffs action against the

defendants is for defamation of character arising out

of an accusation by the defendant Taranjit Bhullar

that she was sexually assaulted by the plaintiff,

which accusation was published by the defendants.

The defendant Mrs. Bhullar alleges that the plaintiff

sexually assaulted her, and she and her husband

counterclaim for damages against the plaintiff.

The background, briefly, is that the plaintiff at all

material times was the priest at the Topaz Street

Temple of the Khalsa Diwan Society, which is a Sikh

religious society. The plaintiff came to Canada in

1984 and resided for a year in Grand Prairie with his

daughter. Prior to coming to Canada, he had been a

policeman in the Punjab and retired with the rank of

Inspector in 1981. He had no training in the

priesthood but was a devout Sikh. There does not seem

to be much dispute that he was knowledgeable in the

religion and was qualified to act as a priest, as

there does not appear to be any need for prior formal

religious training to act as a priest in a temple.

While in Grand Prairie, he saw an advertisement in an

ethnic newspaper advertising for a priest at Golden.

He applied and was successful and presided as a priest

there for some nine months. With this experience he

was accepted as a priest at 1 00 Mile House where he

presided for a year. He then heard of an opening at

the Topaz Street Temple in Victoria and on October

1st, 1986, he was employed there as the priest on a

contract basis which provided for two months' notice

by either party. He continued as priest until the

summer following the incident which is the subject of

this law suit, when he was discharged.

The plaintiff was sixty-eight years of age at all

material times, was married and had children. He and

his wife and a daughter resided in the living quarters

of the temple. Following his appointment, things went

along reasonably well, although there was friction

with the executive of the Society - no doubt partly

due to the plaintiffs rigidity in some areas. Toward

the end of December, 1987 the friction between him and

the Committee increased and the plaintiff became

convinced that a group in the temple, including the

defendants, wished to be rid of him. It is his

position that there was a conspiracy to effect his

removal, starting with their sending a white woman to

the temple to compromise him sexually. That plot

failed as she was drunk. He alleges that thereafter

there was a meeting between the various defendants and

others who plotted to have the female defendant

compromise him, again with the purpose of getting rid

of him. However, as part of his case, the plaintiff

alleges only the slander and not a conspiracy to

remove him as priest, which seems to be the subject

matter of another lawsuit.

The plaintiff testified that he met the Bhullars in

1986 and that they were regular attenders at the

temple. They were helpful with his daughter's marriage

and by 1987 he and the Bhullars became good friends.

He testified that from time to time he saw Mrs.

Bhullar alone and that at times they discussed

problems she had with her husband. He described their

relationship as that of a family membership.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age and

her husband is a comparable age. The plaintiff said

that in 1988, when Mrs. Bhullar left one night after

visiting, she embraced him and kissed him on the

cheek. He said that he was very upset by this. He said

that following this she telephoned him and explained

that such conduct was not unusual in Canada. He said

that in January and February 1989 nothing of a sexual

nature took place between them and that they did not

meet privately during that time. He said that on March

25th, which was just prior to his and his wife's visit

to Seattle, Mrs. Bhullar came to the temple at

lunchtime in response to a call from him. He said they

took food after her arrival and then he went to take a

rest in his bedroom. He said that the defendant came

into the room. At that time he was sitting on a chair

removing his jacket. He said that she removed her

blouse, exposing her naked breasts, sat on his lap,

and put her hands around his neck. He testified that

she said, "I know you need me". He said he was stunned

and pushed her away, telling her that this was not the

way for a daughter to act. The defendant left and the

plaintiff then went to the temple and prostrated

himself before the Holy Book. He said that he and his

wife left for Seattle the next day, returning April

5th of 1989. He telephoned Mrs. Bhullar at her office

but as she was busy she telephoned him the following

day. He said he recorded the call on his answering

machine. He said he told her he would tell her husband

that she was not acting like a daughter. He said he

did, in fact, telephone her husband on the 6th and

told him that his wife was not faithful. He met her

husband in the afternoon and spoke to him further. He

said that on April 30th there was a meeting of the

Committee and his employment and raise were discussed.

He denied that there was any condition of immediate

dismissal in the case of lack of moral turpitude. He

said he did not speak to the defendants from April

through to June. On July 22nd, there was a meeting of

the Temple Committee and the plaintiff was advised by

Mr. Bajwa and Mr. Pannu that Mr. and Mrs. Bhullar had

lodged a complaint against him and that there was a

tape of a conversation between the plaintiff and Mrs.

Bhullar. The tape was apparently played, which

resulted in the plaintiffs employment being

terminated. After listening to the tape and hearing

the accusation of Mrs. Bhullar, the Committee accepted

as a fact that the plaintiff had sexually assaulted

the female defendant.

The plaintiffs position is that this allegation is

false and that the true state of affairs is that it

was the defendant who wrongfully exposed herself

before him and was sexually aggressive toward him, and

that he took no part in it. The plaintiffs position is

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further employment as a priest.

A considerable amount of evidence was called with

respect to various taped telephone conversations,

produced by both the plaintiff and the defendants

Bhullar, and other evidence of conflicts in the temple

which do not relate much to the law suit. The

plaintiff alleges that there was a conspiracy to

remove him and that the conduct of the female

defendant which he described was orchestrated by a

group in the Committee, which included Mr. Pannu and

Mr. Bajwa, to compromise the plaintiff. The plaintiff

called Mr. Gurbakash Sihota, who testified that he met

the defendants Bajwa and Pannu in February 1989 and

that Mr. Johal, Mr. Ajwall and Mr. Sanhera were there.

The meeting was at approximately 9:00 p.m. and was

arranged to congratulate Bajwa and Pannu for their

election to office on the Temple Committee. The last

three mentioned come from Vancouver. He said they then

discussed getting rid of the plaintiff, as there was a

complaint by Mr. Bajwa about the priest interfering in

a wedding ceremony when Mr. Bajwa sang a poem. Mr.

Pannu's complaint was that the priest contradicted his

mother-in-law. The consensus was that they should get

rid of the priest and that they had a girl ready to

entice him into making sexual advances. The name

mentioned was the female defendant, Bhullar. Mr.

Sihota said that Pannu had mentioned that they had

tried a white lady but it did not work because she got

drunk when she was sent to the temple and the

plaintiff" got away". In cross-examination the witness

tied himself to the meeting taking place on February

11 tho

The case for the defence is that the plaintiff was not

defamed and that, in fact, the allegation of a sexual

assault is true. The Bhullars in their counterclaim

ask for damages against the plaintiff for the sexual

assault.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age, was

born in India and came to Canada in 1962, where she

took her education through Grade 12 at Oak Bay High

School and Camosun College. She has been with the

Workers Compensation Board for some seventeen years

and is presently a Claims Adjudicator, a position she

has held for some four years. She was married in 1985

and has one daughter of five years of age. Her husband

works for the Municipality of Saanich. They met the

plaintiff when he became a priest. They attended the

Topaz Street Temple regularly from 1986 through 1988

and they became close to the plaintiff. Initially,

Mrs. Bhullar and her husband responded to his need for

help in the community as he was a stranger. In 1987

the plaintiff needed a drive to a religious ceremony.

Mrs. Bhullar drove him there and said he put his hand

on her hand and she asked him to take it off. He later

asked, "How about a kiss?" and she said, "You've got

to be kidding". She told her husband about this

incident and they cut down their visits with the

plaintiff and their attendance at the temple

significantly. She said that at the end of 1988 the

plaintiff called her to meet him in private to talk

over his problems. She said they met at the temple and

nothing untoward happened. In December of 1988 the

plaintiff was persistently telephoning her and at

times asked her to bring food. On one occasion she did

take along Chinese food and it was consumed in his

quarters. On leaving she said he asked for a hug and a

kiss and that she pushed him away. Following this she

received telephone calls at work and by January and

February 1989 he was calling her as much as four times

a day, two or three times a week. In addition, when

she was not available, she received messages from time

to time that "Father had called". She said that in

early January the plaintiff had telephoned and was

very angry and upset with her as somebody in his

family had died and the Bhullars had not been

available to help him. She said that in mid-February

the plaintiff wanted to meet her at the library in the

temple for lunch as he wanted to talk to her. She went

and was met at the top of the stairs by the plaintiff,

who said the lunch was laid on in the library. She

asked where his wife and daughter were and he told her

they had had their lunch and were sleeping. She said

"We went to another room, which was the guest room,

where lunch was laid out". There were two beds and a

dresser. They ate the food sitting on the beds. He sat

on one and she sat on the other. She said that the

plaintiff came to the bed and put his arm around her

and pushed her back onto the bed. She said he put his

hand underneath her blouse and with his other hand

tugged at her skirt. She said she tried to pull away.

He told her he couldn't take her nylons off, although

he was trying. She said she pulled herself together

and pushed him away. She said she "got loud", meaning

that she raised her voice. He said "Don't get loud,

the bitches are sleeping in the next room". Mrs.

Bhullar then left through the library and went back to

work, very upset. At that time she did not discuss

what had happened with Ms. Mettis, her case assistant,

although Ms. Mettis asked her what was the matter. She

said in April she received a call from the plaintiff

threatening to blackmail her. He said that he had a

taped conversation which incriminated her. She said

she was devastated. She reported to work as usual, but

while going over a file with Ms. Mettis she broke down

in tears and then told her what had happened at the

temple. She was advised to tell her husband, which she

did. They did not attend at the temple after that.

Following her disclosure of the assault to her husband

they went to the police, who suggested that the matter

be sorted out in the Sikh community. She said to

protect themselves against a case of slander they

purchased a recording device and that during

conversations with the plaintiff she led him to

believe that she had not told her husband. Various

conversations were recorded. At the same time, the

plaintiff was busy recording conversations on his

machine.

Mrs. Bhullar denies that she was a party to any

conspiracy to compromise the plaintiff with the

purpose of having him removed.

The defendant husband was called and his evidence

paralleled that of his wife. He also testified that he

was not a party to any agreement to effect the removal

of the plaintiff.

The other defendants were called and they all gave

evidence to the same effect. After hearing Mrs.

Bhullar's accusation of sexual assault by the

plaintiff, which they believed, and the taped

telephone conversations, they concluded that he had in

fact committed a sexual assault and this was the

foundation for his being removed as a priest. The

defendants deny that there was any meeting as alleged

by Mr. Sihota.

The defence called Ms. Mettis, who confirmed the

evidence of the female defendant and, in particular,

the numerous calls made by the plaintiff to Mrs.

Bhullar, her emotional state following the visit to

the temple, and what was disclosed to her later when

Mrs. Bhullar broke down at the office.

The defence called Mr. Rajinder Sihota, who is a

senior accountant with the Ministry of Finance. He

testified that on February 13th, 1989 he was in a

police station in the Punjab with respect to a

complaint concerning Gurbakash Sihota, the witness

called for the plaintiff who alleged the conspiracy

meeting. Mr. Rajinder Sihota testified that the

plaintiffs witness was not only in the Punjab on the

13th February, but had been there for some time.

Logistically it would not have been possible for him

to be in Victoria on February lIth due to time changes

and travelling time. Mr. Rajinder Sihota also

testified that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was a

cousin of his and had a bad reputation. In addition,

he had information that his cousin had been in the

Punjab for a few months at that time.

The defence's position can be summarized as a complete

denial of the allegation of defamation or of a

conspiracy. With respect to the counterclai:t;n, the

defence claims that the evidence of the defendants

should be accepted and that the Court should find that

the plaintiff sexually assaulted the female defendant.

I have to assess the credibility of the various

witnesses called and also consider the tape recordings

which have been led in evidence and the allegation by

the defence that the plaintiffs tape recordings have

been tampered with and are, in fact, extracts from

other conversations taken out of context. The defence

also takes the position that the tape recordings that

have been produced by the defence make it quite clear

that the plaintiff admitted to the sexual assault.

Both the plaintiff and the defence called evidence of

experts dealing with the authenticity of the tapes.

The defendants' expert listened to the tapes and

conducted sound tests. In my view, his evidence should

be preferred to that of the plaintiffs expert, who did

not carry out this testing. The conclusion of the

defendants' expert is that the tape of the plaintiff

was not prepared, as he testified, by using a tape

recorder or answering machine and speaking to an

answering machine and telephone, but that in fact all

the conversations were taken from a telephone line. I

find this evidence credible. I accept it and conclude

that the tape prepared by the plaintiff has been

concocted by him and not recorded as he testified.

Listening to the defendants' tapes with the assistance

of the witnesses and the interpreter persuades me that

the inference to be taken from them is that the

plaintiff admitted to sexually assaulting the female

defendant and that the Committee was well justified in

accepting the evidence of Mrs. Bhullar and the tapes

in concluding that the plaintiff had sexually

assaulted her.

With respect to the alleged meeting between the

executives at Mr. Sihota's house, I conclude that this

evidence was fabricated and quite untrue and I accept

the evidence of Mr. Rajinder Sihota called for the

defence that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was in fact

in the Punjab at the time when the supposed

conversation and conspiracy took place.

I conclude therefore that the plaintiff has failed to

prove his allegation of a wrongful accusation of

sexual assault and find that in fact the sexual

assault did take place. The plaintiffs action is

accordingly dismissed with costs.

With respect to the counterclaim, I find that the

defendants have proved their counterclaim and that the

plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted the female

defendant. The plaintiff - who, as a priest in a

position of authority and influence, sexually

assaulted a female parishioner in the tight-knit

society of the Sikh community in Victoria - is guilty

of an extremely serious offence.

DAMAGES

The counterclaim is advanced by both Bhullars against

the plaintiff for the sexual assault. It is my view

that the only one who can succeed in the counterclaim

is Mrs. Bhullar. The defendant argues as if there is a

counterclaim for defamation of character as well as

sexual assault, but in fact that is not what the

pleadings disclose. In any event, a case has not been

made out to entitle Mr. Bhullar to damages.

With respect to general damages for the sexual

assault, I have to bear in mind the gravity of the

assault, the circumstances of it, and its effect on

Mrs. Bhullar. In this case, unlike a number of others

where damages have been sought for sexual assault, the

assault is of a comparatively minor nature in the

sense that there was only the one incident, as opposed

to cases where the assault was a rape or a similar

crime of violence, or assaults on younger people, that

have often continued over a number of years. Little is

to be gained by trying to compare damages in cases

that are not similar to the case at bar, so I do not

propose to review the current authorities which are

not bountiful. What I have to deal with here is an

assault by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest, who is the plaintiff. The emotional

impact of the forceful touching of the plaintiffs

chest and the attempt to take off her stockings is not

only offensive but appalling, particularly as the

priest in the Sikh religion is held in high esteem and

the utmost in decorum is expected of him. He was in a

position of trust and abused that trust. The assault

was made possible because of the respect of Mrs.

Bhullar for the plaintiff as priest and her being at

the temple at all was at his request. With respect to

the consequences or the effect on Mrs. Bhullar, there

is very little evidence before me other than her

feelings of humiliation, shock and degradation. There

do not appear to be any serious after-effects other

than distaste for the whole matter. Consequently, it

is my view that the damages should reflect the

seriousness of the assault but damages in other more

serious cases should be borne in mind to keep a

balanced perspective of damages under this head. To

some extent the impact on Mrs Bhullard is lessened, as

her success in this lawsuit vindicates her and face is

saved in a society where it is very important. By the

same token, the plaintiff is discredited and has lost

all respect and credibility in his community. I award

general damages to Mrs. Bhullar in the amount of

$5,000.00 for the sexual assault.

A claim has been advanced for punitive damages. In

this case it is my view that it is appropriate that

punitive damages be awarded. They are not awarded on

the basis of compensation but on the principle of

punishment. In this case no criminal proceedings were

launched, although the Bhullars did report the matter

to the police, who left it to the Sikh community to

sort out the matter and did not proceed with charges.

Consequently, the element of punishment of the

plaintiff for his conduct has not been addressed. In

this case punitive damages need be awarded to express

society's disapproval of the conduct of the plaintiff

as a priest in authority and trust breaching that

trust and sexually assaulting a parishioner. His

attempting, after that, to manufacture evidence and

shift the blame away from himself and his harassment

of Mrs. Bhullar is despicable. I award the sum of

$5,000.00 as punitive damages. Mrs. Bhullar will have

her costs of the counterclaim and pre-judgment

interest at the rate set by the Registrar from time to

time.

MACDONELL J.

(JUDGE)

================================================

To All: It has been confirmed that KalaAfghana is

infact convicted Sex offendar, I just got email from

Mrs. Bhullar Attorney, I am forwarding that where in

he has indicated that he was successfull in his case

against Khalsa.

What a joke we have been honoring a sex offendar in

Gurudwara's and passing him as a scholar and reformer.

Thanks,

Jagwinder Singh

From: Chris Considine QC

<cmconsidine@...>

To: JAGWINDER BANIPAL <jagwinder@...>

Subject: Re: B.C.J. No. 378 Victoria Registry No.

89/1983 Khalsa v. Bhullar

Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 06:09:18 -0700

Dear Jagwinder Singh ,

I acted for Ms Bhullar and we were successful in the

case .I have not read the digest you sent in detail

but check with B.C.J.if you have any questions

regarding the accuracy of the reported decision .

Yours truly ,

Chris Considine

Link to post
Share on other sites

ADMIN

WAKE UP AND DELETE THE KALA AFGHANIST'S POSTS,

WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE DEROGATIVELY CALLING

SRI GURU GOBIND SINGH JI MAHARAJ 'GOBIND RAI'

DO YOU HAVE NO SHAME?

I FOUND YOU TEACHER'S TRIAL TRANSCRIPT MORE OFFENSIVE

THAN ANYTHING IN CHARITROPAKHIYAN.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ADMIN

WAKE UP AND DELETE THE KALA AFGHANIST'S POSTS,

WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE DEROGATIVELY CALLING

SRI GURU GOBIND SINGH JI MAHARAJ 'GOBIND RAI'

DO YOU HAVE NO SHAME?

I FOUND YOU TEACHER'S TRIAL TRANSCRIPT MORE OFFENSIVE

THAN ANYTHING IN CHARITROPAKHIYAN.

Fateh, Veer ji!

I share your concerns.

To be honest, I think the mods here are too busy trying to be politically correct and naively tolerant to the point where they allow slander of Bani and the Gurus and allow people a platform for their anti-Sikhi parchar without giving thought to the fact that it may confuse young Sikhs reading these forums.

I hope they delete this moorakh, but I wouldn't hold your breath as the mods have allowed Bahadur Ali (formerly known as Bahadur Singh Nirmala and Francisco Jose Luis, and under various monikers on this forum such as Morghe Sahar, Lalleshvari, Javanmard, etc) to excrete his nonsense about Sikhi being nothing but a school of Shia Islam, that Guru Nanak Dev Ji was a Muslim and that we are all misguided idiots who need to be guided to the True Religion . He has also spread lies on his Shia forums about Nihangs using their dumalla shingar to rape Muslim women, among other truly despicable things that may result in actual bodily harm comning to Gursikhs who happen to live in the proximity of fanatical Muslims.

They have banned him several times, then allowed him back as soon as the Sangat's uproar has died down, but by that point the damage has already been done. Where are the Islamic boards where a Sikh would be allowed to utter similar things against their prophet and their precious deen?

Mods, if the Akal Takht has already declared these people as apostates, why are their views allowed to be aired here? Do you not feel that there are plenty of places on the internet where they have spread their filth, and that it is not too hard for a Gursikh who wants to read their ignorant writings to find them? Why give these people a platform here, in a place that is respected by follwers of the traditional schools of Sikh thought as well as the more modern?

I hope you will all think hard about how much tolerance a Sikh should display and that you are able distinguish clear boundaries about what is acceptable and what is not on a SIKH forum.

Regards,

K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(Only a dirty mind of a Kala Afghanist would consider Chatro Pakhyan as juicy.)

Do you believe the teaching of Charitro Pkhyan, that a woman MUST NOT be trusted?

Do you believe in the teaching of Charitro Pkhyan that a person who refuses to saxually satisfy a woman other than his wife when she proposes him for sex, should be hit on the head with a shoe 1,600 times?

Do you believe in the Charitro Pkhyan's teaching of using sexual toys to excite women and torture your followres who do not comply?

Where does in Gurbani says that a disciple should have a thorn (Bhakhra da Kanda) pushed into his ass for disobedience, as is the case in Charitro Pkhyan?

I can continue giving you nearly over 100 instances like these just out of Charitro Pkhyan alone !

You still have NOT answered my questions whther you can READ the Viakhya of these Charitro Pkhyan to you mother & sisters? or from a Gurudwara stage? or on TV? Radio?

If you can NOT then highlight that part of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, that you can NOT analyse among family members and sangat?

Prevent us from doing wrong right? You guys have reduced Sikhi to a religion of moral and ethical rules! You can find these moral rules in every religion in the world. Most Athiests are moralists, what need is there for a person to embrace Sikhi above other religions and ways of life it it is just about morality and ethics??

Consider the 5 vices (Kam, Karodh, Lobh, Moh, Ahnkar) against the qualities being taught by Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji (Sat, Santokh, Daya, Dharam, Dhiraj) then you would understand that in order to be a TRUE Sikh you have to have these morals and develop and ethical character. Just for a moment consider our modern society without these morals, qualities & virtues. It is this concept of Sikhi that makes Sikhism UNIVERSAL.

But HOW do you remember Vaheguru? It is through doing Simran/Zikr of Parmatma’s divine name. You Kala Afghanists claim to be Singh Sabhiyas. Since the current Sikh rehet Maryadha was written by the Singh Sabhiyas and supported by vidhvaans like Sahib Singh, then why don’t you follow the SRM where it says: in Chapter III: A Sikh should wake up in the ambrosial hours (three hours before the dawn), take bath and, concentrating his/her thoughts on One Immortal Being, repeat the name Waheguru. For furthur info please read Prof Sahib Singh’s book Simran Dhiyan barkataan about the importance of Vaheguru Simran.

The sign that you remember Waheguru is from your character i.e. when you remember Sikhi principles being taught by Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, a divine messahe directly from God (Dhur ki Bani), and implement in your daily life !I have come across so many of you so called Naam Simranye who flicker their lips saying Waheguru standing in public and yet stare at every single good looking female in a deragotory manner, lie to make higher profit, etc.!

Remember Jap ji in Nitnem (Page 4): vin gun keethae bhagath n hoe ||Without virtue, there is no devotional worship.

It is the implementation of these qualities in your character that when brings about positive chnage in your individual life, that you would in Ah will say Wah Guru. Understand the grammer here. There is a Sihari associated with the Haha meaning Guru ji di Wah

Doesn't Jaap that you follow teach you that God you have infinte names and based on HIS qualitities which you so violently oppose?

What about nearly fifty other names of God listed in Gurbani like Ram, Murari, Beethal, Niranjan, etc.

If you had cared to have read Gurbani, you would have come accross the Tukh in Anand Sahib, Simrat Shastar punn paap bichardhe that the Simratees and Shastars do veechar on punn and paap. All religions tell you not to lie cheat, kill etc. Atheists follow such morality as well. Sikhi is a roohani marg, prema Bhagti marg, not a religion obsessed with punn and paap like the semitic religions of the middle east.

Very typical of misguided individuals like yourself to use a single line (in this case only HALF of the line) from Gurbani simply to justify your position. Just read the full line and see what Guru ji says at the end of this line. Here is the full line for your satisfaction:

simrith saasathr pu(n)n paap beechaaradhae thathai saar n jaanee ||

The Simritees and the Shaastras discriminate between good and evil, but they do not know the true essence of reality.

Meaning these Hindu Vedas simply taught people what Paap & Pun were an set up inidviduals to be exploited by the Brahmin who would wash their Paap for a nominal fee to be paid to the Poojari and was defined as the Pun !

Guru ji rejected this idea and taught us that we are responsible for our own deeds. Remember Jap ji salok karamee aapo aapanee kae naerrai kae dhoor ||

According to their own actions, some are drawn closer, and some are driven farther away.

Sant Sipahi magazine answer this question most beautifully:

Question. If Bachittar Natak is the autobiography of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then why there is no mention of Vaisakhi 1699 (Amirt Sanskar), battle of Chamkaur Sahib, and martyrdom of the younger Sahibzades?

Answer. This is an amusing question.

Bachittar Natak is a voluminous work and includes Apni Katha, the autobiography of Guru Gobind Singh ji. This is the fifth composition in Sri Dasam Granth Sahib.

Sri Dasam Granth Sahib has fifteen compositions. The first is Jaapu Sahib and the last is Zafarnamah. Except for the Zafarnamah, the letter written to Aurangzeb, the rest of the compositions were completed by 1696 A.D. (bikrami 1753).

It was a brilliant idea to record the date, time, place and year of the completion of this work. This is evident from the closing lines of Chritropakhyan, the fourteenth composition. It says:

“On the banks of river Satluj the granth was completed on Sunday, Bhadro Sudi Eighth 1753 bikrami (1696 A.D). This closes the dialogue between the King and his ministers and with this the four hundred and four episodes come to a good end”.

ਸੰਬਤ ਸਤ੍ਰਹ ਸਹਸ ਭਣਿਜੈ। ਅਰਧ ਸਹਸ ਫੁਨਿ ਤੀਨਿ ਕਹਿਜੈ।।

ਭਾਦ੍ਰਵ ਸੁਦੀ ਅਸਟਮੀ ਰਵਿ ਵਾਰਾ। ਤੀਰ ਸਤੁਦ੍ਰਵ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸੁਧਾਰਾ।।405।।

ਇਤਿ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਪਖਯਾਨੇ ਤਿਆ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰੇ ਮੰਤ੍ਰੀ ਭੂਪ ਸੰਪਾਦੇ

ਚਾਰ ਸੌ ਚਾਰ ਚਰਿਤ੍ਰ ਸਮਾਪਤ ਸਤੁ ਸੁਭਮ ਸਤੁ।।404।।7555।।ਅਫਜੂੰ।।

Autobiography, unlike biography is obviously written during the lifetime of the author and has the incidents mentioned up to that period of time.

Now the Order of the Khalsa was initiated on Vaisakhi, 1699 A.D. (1756 b.) and Sri Dasam Granth was completed three years earlier, in 1696 A.D. (1753 b.)

Battle of Chamkaur Sahib was fought on 7 Poh, Samvat 1761 (1704 A.D.) and younger Sahibzadas of Guru Gobind Singh ji attained martyrdom during this period.

It is thus obvious that the autography penned by Guru Gobind Singh ji years ahead could not include the events and incidents that took place later on.

When Bhai Lehna lived in this world, whatever he did then did NOT matter until he came in touch with Guru Nanak Dev ji and became Guru Angand. Do we care what he said prior to becoming Guru Angand Dev ji? Are any of his teachings prior to becoming Guru Angand Dev ji has any importance or reference in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji or Sikhi? Same goes for the reamining Gurus? So why does it matter where Guru Gobind Singh ji was prior to ARRIVING ON THIS PLANET to teach us how to make a stand against cruelty and injustice? As a matter of fact there were times in histroty when at least four physical bodies were present at one time and yet there was only one Guru (Guru Nanak to Guru Ram Dass)? You really think that Guru ji was created from the dirt that fell from the lion skin a so called Vishnu Bhagat or Devi was meditating on?

Why if the Dasam Granth has existed from Guru Gobind Singh ji's times, that we only found Hemkunt in 1934, first in Himachal Pardesh and then later in Bihar? Why is so much importance attached to place that does not even belong to Guru ji in this Janam? A guru who does not allows himself to be portrayed in a painting to avoid starting Idol Worship, would certainly not be pleased with his Sikhs running to some remote place with links to Hindu mythology !

You should ask this to your Kala Afghana Sahib and his pedophile ways, you guys follow a sexual preditor:

(I am not here to defend Gurbaksh Singh's personal character, RATHER what he has analyzed from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji's teachings. I am certainly NOT saying that one does not have to read Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and only read his books. All I said was that reading his books, the way he has categorised various topics makes it easier for anybody to nderstand the Gurmat principles.

Now lets us take a look at the date of the incidents listed below and when his works are published. Remember Bidhi Chand was a thief by profession, but became a preacher of Sikhism when came in contact with Guru ji. Remember Kauda Rakshas, Bhai Dalla, Bhoomia Chor? Everything action that they did prior to coming in otuch with the Guru was forgiven by Guru ji and today we proudly call them Sikhs. Gurbaksh Singh has gone in front of the Panj Payare and asked for forgiveness and carried out the Tankhah applied to him? Yet you live in the Bhoot Kaal?

I listed incidents where the individuals when summoned by either Akal Tkhat or Panj Payre refuse to accept their verdict, are either convicted by court and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment or a currently denying any involvement (Winnipeg case) despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary !

Yet in case of "Sant" Dhanwant Singhhe has been preaching from Taksali stages in Fresno, & Bakersfield California these days and last week started a 40 days (Hindu Chalisa) at Sikh lady's house. When news appeared in Rozanaspokesman a couple of days ago, all he told the faimly was that there are manmukhs against sants who are trying to chase him down.

NO BODY HAS ANSWERED MY QUESTION AS TO WHY THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF DASAM GRANTH RANGING FROM NEARLY 500 APGES TO IN EXCESS OF 1400 PAGES TODAY? AND THE SHOCKING PART IS THAT IT STILL CONTINUES TO GROW? WHICH CENTRAL SIKH BODY IS FINDING ADDITIONAL GURBANI FROM DASAM PATSHAH AND VERIFYING AND ADDING TO THIS BOOK EVERYDAY? WHY IS IT PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO TEACH OTHERS TO FOLLOW Sikh Rehat Maryada, DO NOT FOLOW THE CODE OF CONDUCT THAT REQUIRES THAT NOT OTHER LITERATURE CAN BE INSTALLED AS EQUAL TO SRI GURU GRANTH SAHIB JI !

Indexed as: Khalsa v. Bhullar

Between Gurbaksh Singh Khalsa, Plaintiff, and Taranjit

Kaur Bhullar, Harinder Singh Bhullar, Gurnam Singh

Bajwa and Kahar Singh Pannu, Defendants

Counsel for the Plaintiff: Douglas S. Cunliffe.

Counsel for the Defendants: Christopher M. Considine.

[1992] B.C.J. No. 378 Victoria Registry No. 89/1983

British Columbia Supreme Court Victoria, British

Columbia

Macdonell J.

Heard: September 3 - 6, 9 - 12 and November 7, 1991

Judgment: February 24, 1992 (15 pp.)

Torts - Defamation 2- Defences - Truth. Sexual assault

- Damages - General

damages - Punitive damages - Punitive damage award

appropriate where a

/1 priest of the Sikh religion breached his position

of trust by sexually assaulting a

parishioner.

The plaintiff sued for damages for defamation of

character. The defendants counterclaimed for damages

for sexual assault. The plaintiff was a priest of a

Sikh religious temple. The summer following the

incident which was the subject of this lawsuit, the

plaintiff was discharged. The plaintiff was

68-years-old, and resided in the living quarters with

his wife and a daughter. His argument was that a

faction in the temple wanted to get rid of him, so

they attempted to put him in a compromising position

with Mrs. B. He claimed that she wrongfully exposed

herself before him and was sexually aggressive towards

him, and that he took no part in it. He further argued

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further

employment as a priest. The case for the defence was

that the plaintiff was not defamed and that, in fact,

the allegation of sexual assault was true.

HELD: The plaintiffs action was dismissed. The

defendant Mrs. B succeeded on her counterclaim, having

proved that the plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted

her. The court awarded her $5,000.00 in general

damages, and $5,000.00 in special damages. The

plaintiff had failed to prove his allegation of a

wrongful accusation of sexual assault. The defendants

had proved their counterclaim AND THE COURT FOUND THAT

IN FACT THE SEXUAL ASSAULT HAD TAKEN PLACE. With

respect to general damages for the sexual assault, the

court had to bear in mind the gravity of the assault,

the circumstances of it, and its effect on Mrs. B. The

assault was of a relatively minor nature in the sense

that there was only one incident. The assault here was

committed by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest. The emotional impact of the forceful

touching of the plaintiffs chest and the attempt to

remove her stockings was not only offensive but

appalling, particularly as the priest in the Sikh

religion is held in high esteem and the utmost in

decorum is expected of him. He was in a position of

trust and abused the trust. On the other hand, there

did not appear to be any serious after-effects on Mrs.

B other than distaste for the whole matter. The impact

on Mrs. B would be lessened by her vindication in this

lawsuit, allowing her to save face.

MACDONELL J.:- The plaintiffs action against the

defendants is for defamation of character arising out

of an accusation by the defendant Taranjit Bhullar

that she was sexually assaulted by the plaintiff,

which accusation was published by the defendants.

The defendant Mrs. Bhullar alleges that the plaintiff

sexually assaulted her, and she and her husband

counterclaim for damages against the plaintiff.

The background, briefly, is that the plaintiff at all

material times was the priest at the Topaz Street

Temple of the Khalsa Diwan Society, which is a Sikh

religious society. The plaintiff came to Canada in

1984 and resided for a year in Grand Prairie with his

daughter. Prior to coming to Canada, he had been a

policeman in the Punjab and retired with the rank of

Inspector in 1981. He had no training in the

priesthood but was a devout Sikh. There does not seem

to be much dispute that he was knowledgeable in the

religion and was qualified to act as a priest, as

there does not appear to be any need for prior formal

religious training to act as a priest in a temple.

While in Grand Prairie, he saw an advertisement in an

ethnic newspaper advertising for a priest at Golden.

He applied and was successful and presided as a priest

there for some nine months. With this experience he

was accepted as a priest at 1 00 Mile House where he

presided for a year. He then heard of an opening at

the Topaz Street Temple in Victoria and on October

1st, 1986, he was employed there as the priest on a

contract basis which provided for two months' notice

by either party. He continued as priest until the

summer following the incident which is the subject of

this law suit, when he was discharged.

The plaintiff was sixty-eight years of age at all

material times, was married and had children. He and

his wife and a daughter resided in the living quarters

of the temple. Following his appointment, things went

along reasonably well, although there was friction

with the executive of the Society - no doubt partly

due to the plaintiffs rigidity in some areas. Toward

the end of December, 1987 the friction between him and

the Committee increased and the plaintiff became

convinced that a group in the temple, including the

defendants, wished to be rid of him. It is his

position that there was a conspiracy to effect his

removal, starting with their sending a white woman to

the temple to compromise him sexually. That plot

failed as she was drunk. He alleges that thereafter

there was a meeting between the various defendants and

others who plotted to have the female defendant

compromise him, again with the purpose of getting rid

of him. However, as part of his case, the plaintiff

alleges only the slander and not a conspiracy to

remove him as priest, which seems to be the subject

matter of another lawsuit.

The plaintiff testified that he met the Bhullars in

1986 and that they were regular attenders at the

temple. They were helpful with his daughter's marriage

and by 1987 he and the Bhullars became good friends.

He testified that from time to time he saw Mrs.

Bhullar alone and that at times they discussed

problems she had with her husband. He described their

relationship as that of a family membership.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age and

her husband is a comparable age. The plaintiff said

that in 1988, when Mrs. Bhullar left one night after

visiting, she embraced him and kissed him on the

cheek. He said that he was very upset by this. He said

that following this she telephoned him and explained

that such conduct was not unusual in Canada. He said

that in January and February 1989 nothing of a sexual

nature took place between them and that they did not

meet privately during that time. He said that on March

25th, which was just prior to his and his wife's visit

to Seattle, Mrs. Bhullar came to the temple at

lunchtime in response to a call from him. He said they

took food after her arrival and then he went to take a

rest in his bedroom. He said that the defendant came

into the room. At that time he was sitting on a chair

removing his jacket. He said that she removed her

blouse, exposing her naked breasts, sat on his lap,

and put her hands around his neck. He testified that

she said, "I know you need me". He said he was stunned

and pushed her away, telling her that this was not the

way for a daughter to act. The defendant left and the

plaintiff then went to the temple and prostrated

himself before the Holy Book. He said that he and his

wife left for Seattle the next day, returning April

5th of 1989. He telephoned Mrs. Bhullar at her office

but as she was busy she telephoned him the following

day. He said he recorded the call on his answering

machine. He said he told her he would tell her husband

that she was not acting like a daughter. He said he

did, in fact, telephone her husband on the 6th and

told him that his wife was not faithful. He met her

husband in the afternoon and spoke to him further. He

said that on April 30th there was a meeting of the

Committee and his employment and raise were discussed.

He denied that there was any condition of immediate

dismissal in the case of lack of moral turpitude. He

said he did not speak to the defendants from April

through to June. On July 22nd, there was a meeting of

the Temple Committee and the plaintiff was advised by

Mr. Bajwa and Mr. Pannu that Mr. and Mrs. Bhullar had

lodged a complaint against him and that there was a

tape of a conversation between the plaintiff and Mrs.

Bhullar. The tape was apparently played, which

resulted in the plaintiffs employment being

terminated. After listening to the tape and hearing

the accusation of Mrs. Bhullar, the Committee accepted

as a fact that the plaintiff had sexually assaulted

the female defendant.

The plaintiffs position is that this allegation is

false and that the true state of affairs is that it

was the defendant who wrongfully exposed herself

before him and was sexually aggressive toward him, and

that he took no part in it. The plaintiffs position is

that such a false accusation against a priest is

particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his

being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain

further employment as a priest.

A considerable amount of evidence was called with

respect to various taped telephone conversations,

produced by both the plaintiff and the defendants

Bhullar, and other evidence of conflicts in the temple

which do not relate much to the law suit. The

plaintiff alleges that there was a conspiracy to

remove him and that the conduct of the female

defendant which he described was orchestrated by a

group in the Committee, which included Mr. Pannu and

Mr. Bajwa, to compromise the plaintiff. The plaintiff

called Mr. Gurbakash Sihota, who testified that he met

the defendants Bajwa and Pannu in February 1989 and

that Mr. Johal, Mr. Ajwall and Mr. Sanhera were there.

The meeting was at approximately 9:00 p.m. and was

arranged to congratulate Bajwa and Pannu for their

election to office on the Temple Committee. The last

three mentioned come from Vancouver. He said they then

discussed getting rid of the plaintiff, as there was a

complaint by Mr. Bajwa about the priest interfering in

a wedding ceremony when Mr. Bajwa sang a poem. Mr.

Pannu's complaint was that the priest contradicted his

mother-in-law. The consensus was that they should get

rid of the priest and that they had a girl ready to

entice him into making sexual advances. The name

mentioned was the female defendant, Bhullar. Mr.

Sihota said that Pannu had mentioned that they had

tried a white lady but it did not work because she got

drunk when she was sent to the temple and the

plaintiff" got away". In cross-examination the witness

tied himself to the meeting taking place on February

11 tho

The case for the defence is that the plaintiff was not

defamed and that, in fact, the allegation of a sexual

assault is true. The Bhullars in their counterclaim

ask for damages against the plaintiff for the sexual

assault.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age, was

born in India and came to Canada in 1962, where she

took her education through Grade 12 at Oak Bay High

School and Camosun College. She has been with the

Workers Compensation Board for some seventeen years

and is presently a Claims Adjudicator, a position she

has held for some four years. She was married in 1985

and has one daughter of five years of age. Her husband

works for the Municipality of Saanich. They met the

plaintiff when he became a priest. They attended the

Topaz Street Temple regularly from 1986 through 1988

and they became close to the plaintiff. Initially,

Mrs. Bhullar and her husband responded to his need for

help in the community as he was a stranger. In 1987

the plaintiff needed a drive to a religious ceremony.

Mrs. Bhullar drove him there and said he put his hand

on her hand and she asked him to take it off. He later

asked, "How about a kiss?" and she said, "You've got

to be kidding". She told her husband about this

incident and they cut down their visits with the

plaintiff and their attendance at the temple

significantly. She said that at the end of 1988 the

plaintiff called her to meet him in private to talk

over his problems. She said they met at the temple and

nothing untoward happened. In December of 1988 the

plaintiff was persistently telephoning her and at

times asked her to bring food. On one occasion she did

take along Chinese food and it was consumed in his

quarters. On leaving she said he asked for a hug and a

kiss and that she pushed him away. Following this she

received telephone calls at work and by January and

February 1989 he was calling her as much as four times

a day, two or three times a week. In addition, when

she was not available, she received messages from time

to time that "Father had called". She said that in

early January the plaintiff had telephoned and was

very angry and upset with her as somebody in his

family had died and the Bhullars had not been

available to help him. She said that in mid-February

the plaintiff wanted to meet her at the library in the

temple for lunch as he wanted to talk to her. She went

and was met at the top of the stairs by the plaintiff,

who said the lunch was laid on in the library. She

asked where his wife and daughter were and he told her

they had had their lunch and were sleeping. She said

"We went to another room, which was the guest room,

where lunch was laid out". There were two beds and a

dresser. They ate the food sitting on the beds. He sat

on one and she sat on the other. She said that the

plaintiff came to the bed and put his arm around her

and pushed her back onto the bed. She said he put his

hand underneath her blouse and with his other hand

tugged at her skirt. She said she tried to pull away.

He told her he couldn't take her nylons off, although

he was trying. She said she pulled herself together

and pushed him away. She said she "got loud", meaning

that she raised her voice. He said "Don't get loud,

the bitches are sleeping in the next room". Mrs.

Bhullar then left through the library and went back to

work, very upset. At that time she did not discuss

what had happened with Ms. Mettis, her case assistant,

although Ms. Mettis asked her what was the matter. She

said in April she received a call from the plaintiff

threatening to blackmail her. He said that he had a

taped conversation which incriminated her. She said

she was devastated. She reported to work as usual, but

while going over a file with Ms. Mettis she broke down

in tears and then told her what had happened at the

temple. She was advised to tell her husband, which she

did. They did not attend at the temple after that.

Following her disclosure of the assault to her husband

they went to the police, who suggested that the matter

be sorted out in the Sikh community. She said to

protect themselves against a case of slander they

purchased a recording device and that during

conversations with the plaintiff she led him to

believe that she had not told her husband. Various

conversations were recorded. At the same time, the

plaintiff was busy recording conversations on his

machine.

Mrs. Bhullar denies that she was a party to any

conspiracy to compromise the plaintiff with the

purpose of having him removed.

The defendant husband was called and his evidence

paralleled that of his wife. He also testified that he

was not a party to any agreement to effect the removal

of the plaintiff.

The other defendants were called and they all gave

evidence to the same effect. After hearing Mrs.

Bhullar's accusation of sexual assault by the

plaintiff, which they believed, and the taped

telephone conversations, they concluded that he had in

fact committed a sexual assault and this was the

foundation for his being removed as a priest. The

defendants deny that there was any meeting as alleged

by Mr. Sihota.

The defence called Ms. Mettis, who confirmed the

evidence of the female defendant and, in particular,

the numerous calls made by the plaintiff to Mrs.

Bhullar, her emotional state following the visit to

the temple, and what was disclosed to her later when

Mrs. Bhullar broke down at the office.

The defence called Mr. Rajinder Sihota, who is a

senior accountant with the Ministry of Finance. He

testified that on February 13th, 1989 he was in a

police station in the Punjab with respect to a

complaint concerning Gurbakash Sihota, the witness

called for the plaintiff who alleged the conspiracy

meeting. Mr. Rajinder Sihota testified that the

plaintiffs witness was not only in the Punjab on the

13th February, but had been there for some time.

Logistically it would not have been possible for him

to be in Victoria on February lIth due to time changes

and travelling time. Mr. Rajinder Sihota also

testified that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was a

cousin of his and had a bad reputation. In addition,

he had information that his cousin had been in the

Punjab for a few months at that time.

The defence's position can be summarized as a complete

denial of the allegation of defamation or of a

conspiracy. With respect to the counterclai:t;n, the

defence claims that the evidence of the defendants

should be accepted and that the Court should find that

the plaintiff sexually assaulted the female defendant.

I have to assess the credibility of the various

witnesses called and also consider the tape recordings

which have been led in evidence and the allegation by

the defence that the plaintiffs tape recordings have

been tampered with and are, in fact, extracts from

other conversations taken out of context. The defence

also takes the position that the tape recordings that

have been produced by the defence make it quite clear

that the plaintiff admitted to the sexual assault.

Both the plaintiff and the defence called evidence of

experts dealing with the authenticity of the tapes.

The defendants' expert listened to the tapes and

conducted sound tests. In my view, his evidence should

be preferred to that of the plaintiffs expert, who did

not carry out this testing. The conclusion of the

defendants' expert is that the tape of the plaintiff

was not prepared, as he testified, by using a tape

recorder or answering machine and speaking to an

answering machine and telephone, but that in fact all

the conversations were taken from a telephone line. I

find this evidence credible. I accept it and conclude

that the tape prepared by the plaintiff has been

concocted by him and not recorded as he testified.

Listening to the defendants' tapes with the assistance

of the witnesses and the interpreter persuades me that

the inference to be taken from them is that the

plaintiff admitted to sexually assaulting the female

defendant and that the Committee was well justified in

accepting the evidence of Mrs. Bhullar and the tapes

in concluding that the plaintiff had sexually

assaulted her.

With respect to the alleged meeting between the

executives at Mr. Sihota's house, I conclude that this

evidence was fabricated and quite untrue and I accept

the evidence of Mr. Rajinder Sihota called for the

defence that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was in fact

in the Punjab at the time when the supposed

conversation and conspiracy took place.

I conclude therefore that the plaintiff has failed to

prove his allegation of a wrongful accusation of

sexual assault and find that in fact the sexual

assault did take place. The plaintiffs action is

accordingly dismissed with costs.

With respect to the counterclaim, I find that the

defendants have proved their counterclaim and that the

plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted the female

defendant. The plaintiff - who, as a priest in a

position of authority and influence, sexually

assaulted a female parishioner in the tight-knit

society of the Sikh community in Victoria - is guilty

of an extremely serious offence.

DAMAGES

The counterclaim is advanced by both Bhullars against

the plaintiff for the sexual assault. It is my view

that the only one who can succeed in the counterclaim

is Mrs. Bhullar. The defendant argues as if there is a

counterclaim for defamation of character as well as

sexual assault, but in fact that is not what the

pleadings disclose. In any event, a case has not been

made out to entitle Mr. Bhullar to damages.

With respect to general damages for the sexual

assault, I have to bear in mind the gravity of the

assault, the circumstances of it, and its effect on

Mrs. Bhullar. In this case, unlike a number of others

where damages have been sought for sexual assault, the

assault is of a comparatively minor nature in the

sense that there was only the one incident, as opposed

to cases where the assault was a rape or a similar

crime of violence, or assaults on younger people, that

have often continued over a number of years. Little is

to be gained by trying to compare damages in cases

that are not similar to the case at bar, so I do not

propose to review the current authorities which are

not bountiful. What I have to deal with here is an

assault by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh

temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend

by the priest, who is the plaintiff. The emotional

impact of the forceful touching of the plaintiffs

chest and the attempt to take off her stockings is not

only offensive but appalling, particularly as the

priest in the Sikh religion is held in high esteem and

the utmost in decorum is expected of him. He was in a

position of trust and abused that trust. The assault

was made possible because of the respect of Mrs.

Bhullar for the plaintiff as priest and her being at

the temple at all was at his request. With respect to

the consequences or the effect on Mrs. Bhullar, there

is very little evidence before me other than her

feelings of humiliation, shock and degradation. There

do not appear to be any serious after-effects other

than distaste for the whole matter. Consequently, it

is my view that the damages should reflect the

seriousness of the assault but damages in other more

serious cases should be borne in mind to keep a

balanced perspective of damages under this head. To

some extent the impact on Mrs Bhullard is lessened, as

her success in this lawsuit vindicates her and face is

saved in a society where it is very important. By the

same token, the plaintiff is discredited and has lost

all respect and credibility in his community. I award

general damages to Mrs. Bhullar in the amount of

$5,000.00 for the sexual assault.

A claim has been advanced for punitive damages. In

this case it is my view that it is appropriate that

punitive damages be awarded. They are not awarded on

the basis of compensation but on the principle of

punishment. In this case no criminal proceedings were

launched, although the Bhullars did report the matter

to the police, who left it to the Sikh community to

sort out the matter and did not proceed with charges.

Consequently, the element of punishment of the

plaintiff for his conduct has not been addressed. In

this case punitive damages need be awarded to express

society's disapproval of the conduct of the plaintiff

as a priest in authority and trust breaching that

trust and sexually assaulting a parishioner. His

attempting, after that, to manufacture evidence and

shift the blame away from himself and his harassment

of Mrs. Bhullar is despicable. I award the sum of

$5,000.00 as punitive damages. Mrs. Bhullar will have

her costs of the counterclaim and pre-judgment

interest at the rate set by the Registrar from time to

time.

MACDONELL J.

(JUDGE)

================================================

To All: It has been confirmed that KalaAfghana is

infact convicted Sex offendar, I just got email from

Mrs. Bhullar Attorney, I am forwarding that where in

he has indicated that he was successfull in his case

against Khalsa.

What a joke we have been honoring a sex offendar in

Gurudwara's and passing him as a scholar and reformer.

Thanks,

Jagwinder Singh

From: Chris Considine QC

<cmconsidine@...>

To: JAGWINDER BANIPAL <jagwinder@...>

Subject: Re: B.C.J. No. 378 Victoria Registry No.

89/1983 Khalsa v. Bhullar

Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2005 06:09:18 -0700

Dear Jagwinder Singh ,

I acted for Ms Bhullar and we were successful in the

case .I have not read the digest you sent in detail

but check with B.C.J.if you have any questions

regarding the accuracy of the reported decision .

Yours truly ,

Chris Considine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their views are easy enough to counter, and have been proven wrong many times before on this and other forums. While Maharaj Ji has said "Moorakhey Nal Na Lujiye", we have to be careful - by banning them before their views have been countered, they will claim we don't have the answers.

Hence, "Guru Da Sikh": if we prove your points to be wrong, will you change your views? If not, there is no point debating. If you agree to change your views if proven wrong, it shows you are interested in what Sikhi really says, which may be different to what your pre-conceived ideas are.

Also, by giving yourself such a username, I hope you live up to the definition of a Gursikh in Gurbani and Bhai Gurdas' vaaran?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their views are easy enough to counter, and have been proven wrong many times before on this and other forums. While Maharaj Ji has said "Moorakhey Nal Na Lujiye", we have to be careful - by banning them before their views have been countered, they will claim we don't have the answers.

Matheen ji,

What is the point? They are countered and they disappear; then they reappear with the same arguments again and again. They are not here to debate, they are here to spread their rubbish in the hopes that they attract new followers among the more vulnerable and less well-read readers of these forums - they know that they do not have a leg to stand on, and they are not here to change their views.

The best idea would be to put up a sticky with counterproofs to their main arguments and leave these moorakhs to rot in their own stupidity.

Edit: does anyone here actually expect cogent arguments and scholarly repudiations from someone who is either too lazy or too ignorant to trim his posts?

Regards,

K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we ban these individuals it only shows our own weakness. We should be able to behave in a civilised manner instead of just killing and silencing everyone who dont share the same beliefs as ourselves.

I hope this individual is not banned, and that members such as kam, valli singh, tsingh and shaheediya will answer his questions.

i agree with what matheen ji says:

Hence, "Guru Da Sikh": if we prove your points to be wrong, will you change your views? If not, there is no point debating. If you agree to change your views if proven wrong, it shows you are interested in what Sikhi really says, which may be different to what your pre-conceived ideas are.

silencing people is a sign of interlectual weakness.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we ban these individuals it only shows our own weakness. We should be able to behave in a civilised manner instead of just killing and silencing everyone who dont share the same beliefs as ourselves.

I hope this individual is not banned, and that members such as kam, valli singh, tsingh and shaheediya will answer his questions.

silencing people is a sign of interlectual weakness.

Fateh!

If someone enters your house and starts slandering your father, it is weakness that makes you throw them out or is it respect for your parent?

If you are so desperate to debate them, go do it in one of their venues. There are plenty of places they call their own. I suggest you go and find out for yourself what their beliefs are and whether they are actually looking for debate or to simply to try to undermine Dasmesh Pita's writings.

Regards,

K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The best idea would be to put up a sticky with counterproofs to their main arguments and leave these moorakhs to rot in their own stupidity.

Good idea - especially since they all have the same argument. N30, get on it! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that arbitrarily silencing people for not agreeing with us

would be unfair,

this however is clearly not the case as Veer Kalyug Singh ji has so

eloquently surmised,

this fellow has launched inflammatory attacks filled with

hatred, spite, puritanical arrogance, vehement disrespect and propagandist furor,

there are some Kala Afghanists here as elsewhere I'm sure,

none of them have ever spoken in such a boisterously insensitive tone while

aiming at wilfully misleading the sangat, nobody is saying that Kala Afghanists in general should be banned

if they agree not to breach the bounds of decorum just as the rest of us do,

but this fellow in one day has cruelly insulted the following with not a shred

of dignity or evidence:

-Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji Maharaj by calling them 'Gobind Rai' in a derogatory manner

-Sri Dasam Guru Darbar (if this is a Pro-Dasam Granth place NOBODY should be allowed to insinuate

that this holy scripture is false let alone type 'so-called Dasam Granth' or suggest that

it is pornographic in nature)

-Baba Nihal Singh ji, Tarna Dal

-the whole Nihang Singh Jathebandi

-Damdami Taksal Gurmukhs

-Lopon Wale Sants from Bhai Daya Singh ji Sampardai

-Sant Hari Singh ji

-Sant Ranjit Singh ji

I'm sure I'm forgetting some,

if Kala Afghana's works are banned in the Panjab

and he is ex-communicated by Sri Akal Takht,

why attach any importance to Sri Akal Takht Sahib at all if we aren't even willing

to prevent and censure the active proliferation of those irreputable views when they

have been so thoroughly repudiated and denounced by our 'highest authority'?

And when it is within our means to simply delete them?

These people have their own sites, brouchures, offices and ashrams

from which they spout their neo-anglican dogmas

WHY ARE WE THEN GIVING THEM ANOTHER PULPIT FROM WHICH TO SPEW?

I think we have to ask ourselves what are the limits of political correctness,

is this a place where Sikhs discuss Sikhism or where Sikhs have to air the views of

those who seek to insult us?

This fellow has not sought to debate anything

in a scholarly manner or with any intellectual inquisitivity whatsoever,

he is trying to stir up our discussions by relentlessly entering each thread

and injecting his puritan rhetoric to see how many people will agree with him,

so far none have, should we sit idley by while someone is mislead?

If you won't ban him at least delete what is offensive, nonsensical and inflammatory

in what he has written and moniter everything he write in future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you won't ban him at least delete what is offensive, nonsensical and inflammatory

in what he has written and monitor everything he write in future

We will take your recommendation and will monitor his posts from now on, he be put under moderation just temporary to avoid offences. I will go through his previous post soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...