Panel suggests ‘action’ on individual in US plot case

The external affairs ministry confirmed last October that Yadav, a former officer of the CRPF deputed to the Research and Analysis Wing, was sacked by the government

An enquiry committee set up by the Indian government to investigate allegations about a plot to kill pro-Khalistan separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun on American soil has recommended legal action against an individual whose “criminal links and antecedents” came to light earlier, the Union home ministry announced on Wednesday.

Gurpatwant Singh Pannun (AP)

The committee, which was headed by a senior official of the National Security Council, also recommended “functional improvements” in procedures and steps to strengthen India’s response and ensure systematic controls in dealing with such matters.

The home ministry’s statement didn’t name the individual against whom the committee recommended legal action or refer to the alleged plot to kill Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) leader Pannun. But people familiar with developments said on the condition of anonymity that the individual is Vikash Yadav, named by the US justice department in October 2024 as the Indian official who allegedly directed the plot to kill Pannun.

The external affairs ministry confirmed last October that Yadav, a former officer of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) deputed to the Research and Analysis Wing, was sacked by the government.

“After a long enquiry, the committee has submitted its report to the Government and recommended legal action against an individual whose earlier criminal links and antecedents also came to notice during the enquiry,” the home ministry said in its statement.

The ministry said that the high-powered committee, set up in November 2023 after the US provided information regarding some organised criminal groups and terror organisations, had submitted its report to the government. The SFJ was banned under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in July 2019 and Pannun was declared a terrorist under the same law in July 2020.

The timing of the submission of the committee’s report, and of the government making it public, is important. It comes days before the Joe Biden administration is set to demit office, and 10 days after US national security adviser Jake Sullivan visited New Delhi. In an interaction in Washington DC last week, in response to a question from HT on the progress in the case, Sullivan had hinted at developments on the issue. “In terms of the question of the enquiry committee, they recently briefed the US side in terms of the progress that they are making. We are continuing to work with them and will until the 20th, but this will go beyond the 20th to ensure that there is both a full accounting of what happened and accountability for what happened,” he had said.

The home ministry statement indicated that the government believed that the incident was orchestrated by one rogue official. Yadav was removed from his position after an indictment filed by US prosecutors in a Manhattan court in November 2023 pointed to his role in the alleged plot without naming him.

In October 2024, HT had first reported, based on inputs of a US official, that India had told the US that the official implicated was no longer employed by the Government of India, a fact the external affairs ministry subsequently confirmed. Within days of the MEA confirmation, Yadav was named in a second indictment filed in the same court. All of it suggested both governments were in close touch on the matter and there was a clear move in Washington DC and New Delhi to publicly distance the Indian government from Yadav before he was formally charged.

“The enquiry committee has recommended that the legal action must be completed expeditiously,” the ministry statement added, without giving details of the action being taken.

According to the statement, the enquiry committee conducted its own investigation and pursued leads provided by the US administration. “It received full cooperation from US authorities and the two sides also exchanged visits. The committee further examined a number of officials from different agencies and also scrutinised relevant documents in this connection,” the statement added.

Two members of the enquiry committee travelled to Washington for meetings and to exchange information with their American counterparts last October. The second indictment, unsealed soon after this visit to the US, had named Yadav, 39, in “connection with his role in directing [the] foiled plot”.

Yadav is now among the wanted persons of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

US prosecutors allege that Yadav worked with Indian national Nikhil Gupta to plot the assassination of Pannun. Czech authorities arrested Gupta at the request of the US in June 2023. After the completion of legal formalities, Gupta was extradited by the Czech Republic to the US in June 2024.

According to US prosecutors, Gupta, acting on Yadav’s instructions, contacted a person he believed to be a criminal associate for help in hiring a hitman to murder Pannun, but this person was a confidential source working with American law enforcement. This source introduced Gupta to a purported hitman, who was actually an undercover US law enforcement officer.

Delhi Police’s Special Cell arrested Yadav in December 2023 following a complaint by businessman Raj Kumar Walia, who accused him of extortion and kidnapping. He was named an accused in a charge sheet in March 2024 and was subsequently granted bail by a court in April.

Yadav committed the alleged kidnapping and extortion of Walia about a month after the US unsealed the first indictment that named Gupta and mentioned him as CC-1 or Gupta’s handler.

Besides pushing for action against Indian government employees allegedly involved in the plot to kill Pannun, US officials have spoken of the need for reforms in India’s intelligence apparatus, with the ministry statement acknowledging that the committee, too, had recommended systemic improvements.

The statement said, “The committee has further recommended functional improvements in systems and procedures as also initiation of steps that could strengthen India’s response capability, ensure systematic controls and coordinated action in dealing with matters like this.”

The manner in which India and the US dealt with the case stood in stark contrast to similar allegations by Canada. Ottawa went public while Washington DC informed Delhi of its concerns privately first at the highest levels. Ottawa offered no evidence and engaged in public grandstanding. Washington, as the home ministry statement itself confirmed, shared specific information and dealt with the issue discreetly. Ottawa let the issue affect the whole bilateral relationship. Washington compartmentalised the issue from the rest of the relationship and continued to deepen strategic and technological ties in the most sensitive of domains with India.

This contrast also meant that Delhi responded differently to the two countries. The government acknowledged receiving US inputs and investigated it, with the committee, after 15 months of work, submitting its report in a bid to close the chapter on an incident that highlighted some chinks in India’s security apparatus and briefly strained India-US ties, and kickstart a new chapter with a new incoming administration.