The United States has charged Vikash Yadav, a former Indian intelligence officer, with orchestrating a foiled plot to assassinate a prominent U.S.-based advocate of Khalistan, an independent Sikh state. The indictment has brought to light allegations of Indian government involvement in targeting dissidents abroad, an issue that has already strained diplomatic relations between India and several Western countries.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York revealed that Yadav, allegedly acting on behalf of Indian intelligence, had attempted to orchestrate the assassination of Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a vocal proponent of the Khalistan movement. The charges of murder-for-hire and money laundering against Yadav underscore a broader narrative of transnational repression and raise questions about how governments deal with dissidents who reside beyond their borders.
The plot, according to the U.S. indictment, began in May 2023 when Yadav allegedly enlisted Nikhil Gupta, an Indian national, to execute the assassination of Pannun. Gupta, facing criminal charges in India, was reportedly offered an inducement — the dismissal of his case in exchange for carrying out the hit. Yadav is accused of providing Gupta with detailed personal information about Pannun, including his home address in New York City, phone numbers, and insights into his daily routine.
The alleged plot escalated in June 2023, when Yadav’s plan moved forward. However, Gupta was apprehended before any harm could come to Pannun, and he was extradited to the United States from the Czech Republic, where he had been imprisoned.
In a statement, the FBI emphasized the seriousness of the charges, asserting that U.S. law enforcement will not tolerate attempts to stifle free speech or acts of retaliation against individuals exercising their constitutional rights. Christopher Wray, the FBI director, said, “The FBI will not tolerate acts of violence or other efforts to retaliate against those residing in the U.S. for exercising their constitutionally protected rights.”
This indictment marks the first time the Indian government has been directly implicated in an alleged assassination attempt on U.S. soil. Pannun, a dual U.S.-Canadian citizen, has been a vocal advocate for Khalistan, a cause that has long antagonized the Indian government. In India, the Khalistan movement is regarded as a separatist and terrorist organization, but many in the diaspora, including Pannun, argue that it is a legitimate movement for the self-determination of Sikhs.
The U.S. Justice Department’s case against Yadav cites his connection to the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), India’s top intelligence agency. Yadav, referred to as “Citizen-1” in the indictment, was described as a former Senior Field Officer with experience in security and intelligence operations. He had also served in India’s paramilitary Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and had undergone extensive training in “battle craft and weapons.”
The Indian government, while acknowledging that the individual identified as CC-1 in the indictment is no longer in its employment, has yet to officially comment on the charges against Yadav. However, it has expressed its willingness to cooperate with the ongoing U.S. investigation, a cooperation that U.S. authorities have affirmed.
In response to the U.S. indictment, Pannun described the attempt on his life as part of a broader pattern of India’s transnational terrorism, alleging that New Delhi had resorted to targeting dissidents abroad to suppress voices of dissent. Speaking from New York, Pannun told the press, “This is a blatant case of India’s transnational terrorism, which has become a challenge to America’s sovereignty and a threat to freedom of speech and democracy.”
Pannun’s remarks add weight to a growing concern over India’s alleged tactics of silencing dissidents in foreign countries. His advocacy for Khalistan has long been controversial. India has labeled him a terrorist, and his group, Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), has been banned in India. Pannun, however, has denied any involvement in terrorism, maintaining that his efforts are peaceful and focused on raising awareness of Sikh rights and their historical grievances with the Indian state.
Yadav’s indictment comes against the backdrop of escalating tensions between India and Canada. In September 2023, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused India of being involved in the assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh separatist leader and Canadian citizen, in Surrey, British Columbia. This led to a diplomatic standoff between the two countries, with both expelling diplomats and issuing sharp rebukes.
Trudeau’s accusations were met with swift denial from India, which dismissed the allegations as “preposterous” and accused Trudeau of pandering to Canada’s influential Sikh diaspora for domestic political gain. India has repeatedly called on Canada to act against individuals it claims are part of criminal networks tied to separatist activities. In particular, New Delhi has requested the extradition of members of the Lawrence Bishnoi gang, a criminal outfit allegedly involved in assassinations and violent acts against Indian interests, including figures tied to the pro-Khalistan movement. Canada, according to Indian officials, has yet to act on these requests.
The U.S. indictment of Yadav only intensifies the international spotlight on India’s alleged involvement in targeting Sikh activists abroad. While U.S. officials have confirmed that India has been cooperative in the ongoing investigation into Pannun’s case, the broader accusations of state-sanctioned violence against dissidents remain contentious.
The charges against Yadav are part of a wider pattern of concern over transnational repression — the use of covert means by governments to silence dissent beyond their borders. In recent years, there have been several high-profile cases of authoritarian states engaging in assassination attempts, surveillance, and intimidation of exiled dissidents, particularly in Europe and North America.
Experts warn that the indictment of Yadav could strain U.S.-India relations, particularly if the U.S. moves forward with a formal extradition request. Although India has denied involvement in these types of operations, the indictment paints a picture of a government willing to go to great lengths to stifle dissident voices abroad.
India’s national security apparatus has long been engaged in efforts to curb the Khalistan movement, which remains a sensitive issue in the country due to the violent insurgency that rocked the state of Punjab in the 1980s and early 1990s. While the movement has largely lost traction in India, its supporters in the diaspora, particularly in countries like Canada, the U.K., and the U.S., continue to push for its revival.
The fallout from Yadav’s indictment is likely to reverberate across international diplomatic channels. In Washington, the State Department has so far maintained a measured response, stating that it was satisfied with India’s cooperation in the investigation. However, the issue is likely to complicate the already delicate diplomatic dynamics between the U.S. and India, which have been working to deepen economic and security ties amid rising tensions with China.
For Canada, which has already found itself at odds with India over the Nijjar assassination allegations, the U.S. indictment could serve as validation of its concerns over Indian actions against Sikh separatists abroad. Earlier this week, the U.S. State Department urged India to cooperate fully with Canada’s investigation, underscoring the delicate balance Western democracies must strike in managing relations with India — a key strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific — while upholding their commitments to human rights and free speech.
The indictment of Vikash Yadav marks a new chapter in the increasingly complex saga of India’s relationship with its diaspora and Western governments. The case will test the boundaries of international law, diplomatic immunity, and the extent to which nations can project power beyond their borders. As the U.S. moves forward with its investigation, the world will be watching closely to see how this case shapes the future of U.S.-India relations and whether it heralds a new era of accountability for state-sponsored transnational repression.
