A Delhi court granted 11-day police custody to American Matthew Aaron Van Dyke and several Ukrainians in an NIA case. They face serious allegations under UAPA, including links to armed insurgent groups and illegal cross-border movement.
Court Cites National Security Concerns
A Delhi court recently granted 11 days of police custody to American national Matthew Aaron Van Dyke along with several Ukrainian citizens in a case registered by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), noting serious concerns related to national security.
The order was passed by the Patiala House Court, which observed that the matter involves allegations that go beyond routine legal violations and requires detailed investigation. The accused were produced before the court after their arrest in connection with a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
NIA Alleges Conspiracy, Links to Armed Groups
The prosecution alleged that the individuals were part of a larger conspiracy involving illegal entry into restricted areas of India, followed by unauthorised cross-border movement into Myanmar. The court noted that such allegations, if established, have a direct bearing on India's security interests.
During the hearing, the court noted that the FIR does not merely concern illegal travel but also refers to alleged links between the accused and certain ethnic armed groups. It further noted allegations that the accused may have supported banned insurgent organisations by facilitating weapons supply, providing training, and engaging in activities involving advanced technologies such as drones. These aspects, the court observed, raise significant national security concerns.
As per the case details recorded in the order, the NIA has alleged that multiple Ukrainian nationals had entered India on separate visas, travelled to the Northeast, and later crossed into Myanmar without permission. The agency claims that these movements were part of a broader plan linked to extremist activities, including possible coordination with other individuals involved in armed operations.
Defence Challenges Arrests, Prosecution Rebuts Claims
On the other hand, Counsel appearing for the accused, challenged the legality of the arrests. He argued that mandatory legal safeguards were not followed, including proper communication of grounds of arrest and compliance with provisions relating to consular access under international law. The defence further contended that the case primarily relates to alleged immigration violations and lacks substantive evidence beyond disclosure statements.
The NIA, represented by Special Public Prosecutor Rahul Tyagi, opposed these arguments and submitted that all due procedures had been followed. The agency stated that the grounds of arrest were communicated to the accused in appropriate languages and that the Ministry of External Affairs had been informed. It was also submitted that steps had been taken to facilitate consular access through the Ukrainian Embassy.
Custodial Interrogation Deemed Necessary for Investigation
While considering the rival submissions, the court made it clear that an FIR cannot be treated as an exhaustive document and must be read as a whole. It observed that criminal conspiracies are often carried out in secrecy and require thorough investigation.
The court further noted that the investigation is still at an early stage and there is a need to examine evidence, analyse digital material, and identify other possible associates.
Taking these factors into account, the court held that custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary to uncover the full extent of the alleged conspiracy. It found no reason to doubt the manner in which the FIR was registered or the investigation was being conducted at this stage.
Accordingly, the court granted 11 days of police custody to the accused. It also directed that their medical examination be conducted every 48 hours and allowed them limited virtual interaction with their lawyers and family members.
The accused have been directed to be produced before the court again on March 27, 2026, for further proceedings. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)