February 13, 2026

Shadows of Khalistan: How the U.S. Legal Victory Complicates India’s Fight Against Overseas Extremism

WASHINGTON – In a Manhattan federal courtroom on Friday, the high-stakes geopolitical drama surrounding a thwarted assassination plot on American soil reached a pivotal legal milestone. Nikhil Gupta, a 54-year-old Indian national, entered a guilty plea to charges of murder-for-hire and conspiracy, ending a chapter of an investigation that has fundamentally tested the strategic partnership between Washington and New Delhi.

While the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has framed the case as a defense of a citizen’s right to free speech, the guilty plea brings back into focus the complex profile of the intended target: Gurpatwant Singh Pannun. The case highlights a widening chasm between Western legal protections of political expression and India’s assertive stance against what it views as extremist threats to its national integrity.

The Anatomy of a Thwarted Hit

According to court documents and the allocution during the plea hearing, Gupta acted as the logistical bridge between an Indian government official and what he believed was a hitman in New York City. The indictment identifies Gupta’s primary handler as Vikash Yadav, a former employee of India’s Cabinet Secretariat, which houses the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), India’s foreign intelligence agency.

The operational details reveal a sophisticated sting:

The Recruitment: In May 2023, Yadav allegedly recruited Gupta—who described himself in encrypted messages as a trafficker of narcotics and weapons—to orchestrate the killing.
The Sting: Gupta contacted a “criminal associate” who was, in reality, a DEA confidential source. This led him to a purported hitman who was an undercover U.S. federal agent.
The Down Payment: In June 2023, Gupta and his associates arranged for the delivery of $15,000 in cash to the undercover agent in Manhattan as a “good faith” advance on a $100,000 contract.

The Target: Activist or Extremist?

While the DOJ press release refers to the target as an “attorney and political activist,” a purely innocent label is a point of intense contention in New Delhi. Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, the leader of the U.S.-based Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), has long been a lightning rod for controversy.

India has designated Pannun as a “terrorist” under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), citing his leadership of a separatist movement aimed at carving “Khalistan” out of the Indian state of Punjab. Beyond political advocacy, Pannun’s rhetoric has frequently crossed into what Indian officials categorize as incitement and threats to national security:

Civil Aviation Threats: Pannun has issued public warnings advising Sikhs not to fly on Air India, hinting at potential danger to the airline—a statement New Delhi viewed as a direct echo of the 1985 Air India Flight 182 bombing.
Incitement to Violence: His video messages often call for the “balkanization” of India and have offered financial rewards for actions against Indian diplomats and the hoisting of separatist flags on government buildings.
Sovereignty Concerns: From the Indian perspective, Pannun is not a victim of suppressed speech, but an operative exploiting Western liberal values to coordinate a campaign of subversion against a sovereign state.

Geopolitical Friction and the “State Visit” Constraint

The intersection of this plot with high-level diplomacy underscores the tension. Gupta specifically instructed the undercover agent not to carry out the assassination during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s official state visit to the United States in June 2023. The logic was strategic: a high-profile killing on U.S. soil during a moment of bilateral celebration would have been a diplomatic catastrophe.

However, the timeline accelerated following the June 18, 2023, assassination of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada. Gupta allegedly told the undercover agent that Nijjar was “also a target” and that following his death, there was “now no need to wait” to strike in New York.

Strategic Implications for U.S.-India Ties

The Gupta plea forces both Washington and New Delhi into uncomfortable positions. For the United States, the principle of protecting its citizens from foreign-directed violence—regardless of the citizen’s inflammatory rhetoric—is a red line. For India, the frustration lies in the perceived “double standard” of Western nations providing a safe haven to individuals they view as violent extremists under the guise of free speech.

The DOJ’s aggressive pursuit of the case, including the naming of Vikash Yadav, signals that Washington will not allow its security partnership with India to serve as a blanket immunity for intelligence operations on U.S. soil. Conversely, the case has fueled a nationalist narrative within India that the country must take “proactive” measures against external threats that Western allies refuse to acknowledge.

What Lies Ahead

Gupta is scheduled to be sentenced on May 29, 2026. He faces a maximum of 20 years for conspiracy to commit money laundering and 10 years each for the murder-for-hire counts. As the legal process concludes for Gupta, the broader strategic dialogue remains unresolved.

The Gupta guilty plea is a victory for U.S. law enforcement regarding transnational repression, but it leaves a gaping wound in bilateral trust. Until Washington and New Delhi can reach a shared understanding of the threat posed by figures like Pannun, the ‘indispensable’ partnership will continue to be haunted by the shadows of their respective security doctrines.

Author profile

Poonam Sharma

Editor

Poonam is a multi-media journalist, and Founder of Global Strat View. She managed India America Today (IAT) for seven years, and launched its print edition in 2019 with IAT's Founder and Editor, the late Tejinder Singh.