the premises. This was seen as an act of desecration of the holiest shrine of the Sikhs and increased their alienation. A fallout of all this was the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1984. This was followed by riots, especially in Delhi, in which thousands of Sikhs were attacked, murdered and their properties destroyed. The administration seemed to do little to stop the violence. After Rajiv Gandhi became the Prime Minister, he held talks with SAD and entered into an agreement with Sant Langowal, the SAD president. Though fresh elections were held in Punjab and SAD won them, peace was short lived as Longowal was assassinated by the militants. In April 1986, an assembly at the Akal Takht made a declaration for an independent state of Khalistan. Several groups claiming to be fighters for an independent state formed armed detachments and engaged in terrorist activities. The government of India claimed that these groups were actively supported by the government of Pakistan. This was a decade of violence and conflict in Punjab. The period of insurgency saw clashes of the Sikh militants with the police, as well as with other religious groups. Journalists, politicians, artists and activists who did not conform to militant-approved behaviour were killed. There were indiscriminate attacks designed to cause extensive civilian casualties: derailing trains, exploding bombs in markets, restaurants and other civilian areas between Delhi and Punjab. In 1991 alone, about a thousand people were killed. The militants were also engaged in large scale kidnapping and extortion to raise funds for their work. All this gradually alienated them from the masses of the Punjabi people including Sikhs. Over a period of time, effective police action broke down the militancy and as public sympathy declined rapidly, peace finally returned to Punjab by the end of the 1990s. However, the government used very harsh methods for the suppression of militancy in Punjab, many of which were seen as violations of Constitutional rights of citizens. Many observers felt that such violations of Constitutional rights and human rights were justified as the Constitutional machinery was on the edge of collapse due to militant activity. Even judges were afraid of passing adverse judgements on the militants for fear of reprisals by them. Other observers felt that such use of extra constitutional powers by the state cannot be justified and in the long run, it would strengthen undemocratic tendencies in the polity.