When flood waters tore through Gurdaspur, Pathankot, and Amritsar last month, submerging villages and breaching embankments, most eyes turned to the big players, the Bhakra Nangal and Pong dams managed by the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). But this time, it wasn’t the Sutlej or Beas rivers that unleashed the greatest fury. It was the Ravi, fed by sudden releases from Punjab’s own Ranjit Sagar Dam (RSD), that brought devastation to the state’s northern belt.The silence around those releases, and how flood regulation was handled at RSD, has become hard to ignore.For decades, successive Punjab governments have accused BBMB of flooding the state by releasing water from Bhakra or Pong without warning. This year, however, BBMB-controlled reservoirs stayed largely under control. Instead, the third major system, outside BBMB’s purview and managed directly by Punjab’s irrigation and power departments, is in the spotlight.By August 25, RSD had already touched its maximum permissible level of 527.91 metres due to relentless inflows from catchments in Himachal and Jammu & Kashmir. On August 26, it held water up to 528.008 metres before opening the gates wide, releasing almost as much as it received: an outflow of 2.15 lakh cusecs against an inflow of 2.25 lakh cusecs.The Madhopur barrage downstream saw flows of 2.22 lakh cusecs, far beyond the Ravi’s safe carrying capacity. The pressure snapped two gates at Madhopur the same day. Matters worsened when the Ujh river, swollen with 2.06 lakh cusecs, joined the Ravi in Gurdaspur, amplifying the flood surge before the river curved along the Indo-Pak border.Read | Against their capacity, state’s rivers ran heavy: Ravi, Beas bore the brunt this seasonOn August 27, outflow stayed above 2.15 lakh cusecs for half the day. Even on August 29, when villages were already inundated, the dam discharged over 1 lakh cusecs. By August 31, with inflows down to 22,000 cusecs, RSD was still releasing 42,000 cusecs, ostensibly to create storage space, prolonging the crisis downstream.Officials admitted that storage had been kept high in the days before the peak inflows. When extraordinary rain filled the reservoir suddenly, “there was no choice but to release large volumes quickly,” they said. The surge damaged floodgates and devastated farmlands.Story continues below this adBBMB officials point to a sharp contrast. At Pong, even when inflows peaked at 2.59 lakh cusecs on August 26, outflow was capped at 85,000 cusecs, with storage maintained up to four feet above the permissible level of 1,390 feet for days. The Beas embankments held firm despite historic inflows of 11.70 billion cubic metres, the highest ever.Explained | Why Punjab keeps floodingAt Bhakra, the reservoir never touched its maximum level, and the Sutlej stayed within its carrying limits, barring minor erosion.“We handled the unprecedented water very carefully with the consent of all states, including Punjab,” said BBMB Chairman Manoj Tripathi, noting that maximum discharges rarely exceeded 1 lakh cusecs except for a brief 1.5 lakh cusecs surge.That difference is fuelling debate. “Whenever the Sutlej or Beas floods, BBMB gets the blame. This time, the Ravi, which is fully under Punjab’s control, ravaged the border districts . Shouldn’t accountability begin at home?” asked a senior drainage department expert.Story continues below this adFarmers echo the sentiment. “Our homes and crops were washed away by Ravi waters, but no one is questioning Ranjit Sagar,” said Harjit Singh from Gurdaspur.Punjab officials insist dam safety dictated the releases. “Extraordinary inflows left us with no option. The structure had to be protected first,” said an irrigation department officer.Water Resources Minister Barinder Goyal said, “The rains were unprecedented. All reservoirs, state and BBMB, were brimming within days. Maintaining a cushion was nearly impossible.”Yet, the sharp contrast between BBMB’s cautious discharges and Punjab’s aggressive releases from RSD has sparked a fresh debate about transparency, flood preparedness, and whether political convenience explains the muted criticism.Story continues below this adDespite repeated attempts, The Indian Express could not reach Sher Singh, Chief Engineer (Canals), Punjab Water Resources Department.