In NIA charge sheet, no terror charges against US national VanDyke, 6 Ukrainians
NIA Files Immigration Charges Against American and Six Ukrainians, Shelves Terror Case for Now
Bharatmorningnews.com – The National Investigation Agency has formally charged a US citizen and six Ukrainian nationals with immigration offences, opting to hold its more sweeping terror-case allegations in reserve. The charge sheet, submitted to the court of special judge Prashant Sharma at Rouse Avenue Courts in New Delhi, lists only sections 21 and 23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act — provisions covering unlawful entry into protected zones and breaches of visa conditions. Notably, the agency did not invoke the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, the statute under which the seven were originally detained.
Arrests and Initial Detention
Mathew Aaron VanDyke, an American national, was taken into custody at Kolkata airport on March 13 under Section 18 of the UAPA, a provision that criminalises conspiracy, advocacy, abetment, or incitement aimed at committing a terrorist act. On that same day, his six Ukrainian companions — Hurba Petro, Taras Slyviak, Ivan Sukmanovskyi, Marian Stefankiv, Maksim Honcharuk, and Viktor Kaminskyi — were apprehended at Delhi and Lucknow airports.
The decision to file only immigration charges, while leaving the terror investigation open, marks a significant procedural step. Under the UAPA, an accused person can be held in custody for up to 180 days before charges must be laid. The NIA had already consumed its initial 90-day window and was granted a further 90 days. The agency now faces the question of whether it can sustain the heavier allegations once the extended period lapses.
What the Charge Sheet Alleges
According to the filing, the seven individuals entered India on valid travel documents in December 2025. They subsequently travelled to Guwahati and Mizoram without securing the mandatory Protected Area Permit (PAP) or Restricted Area Permit (RAP) required for foreign nationals in those zones. The agency alleges they then crossed the India-Myanmar border through an unauthorised point, reaching a location called Victoria Camp, where they were purportedly scheduled to conduct training for Myanmar-based Ethnic Armed Groups in drone warfare, drone operations, assembly, and jamming technology.
The charge sheet states the group returned to India from Myanmar around March 5, 2026. Six taxis, arranged through a car-rental firm that caters to foreign visitors, were hired to transport the accused from Guwahati into Mizoram's protected zone. They allegedly stopped for several hours before crossing into Myanmar via the Tiau river route, arriving at Victoria Camp on December 29, 2025. Two individuals identified as Abika and Viktor/Kima are said to have coordinated the logistics of the border crossing.
Sections 21 and 23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act carry maximum sentences of five years and three years of imprisonment, respectively — a far lighter penalty than the UAPA, which can impose life imprisonment or the death penalty for conspiracy offences.
The UAPA Investigation Remains Open
NIA's special public prosecutor, Rahul Tyagi, confirmed the agency's position:
"We have filed a charge sheet against seven accused under the Immigration and Foreigners Act. The probe has been kept open in all other aspects, including the UAPA charges."
In the charge sheet itself, the agency stated that it had completed a substantial portion of its inquiry into the UAPA offences but required additional time to verify facts. It specifically cited the need to investigate the import and recovery of a large quantity of drones and accessories through Indian territory, as well as the seizure of several digital devices, which it suggested "may indicate their possible involvement in acts affecting/threatening the unity, integrity, security and sovereignty of India."
"Further investigation is under-going and more time is required in order to ascertain and verify the true and complete facts about the commission of offences under UAPA," the agency wrote, seeking judicial permission to continue probing the alleged conspiracy.
The NIA further claimed the trip was not a standalone immigration lapse but part of "a larger conspiracy involving Indian insurgent groups, particularly those active in the northeastern states," and noted that some of the Myanmar-based groups had links with insurgent organisations operating inside India.
VanDyke's Background
VanDyke, who lists Baltimore as his home city, has described himself on his personal website as a soldier, international businessman, war correspondent, and columnist. He claims veteran status from the Libyan revolution, says he was held as a prisoner of war there, and identifies as the founder of SOLI — Sons of Liberty International — a military contracting firm. His profile places him squarely in the orbit of private military operations in conflict zones, a context that gives added weight to the NIA's drone-training allegations.
Defence Response
Rohit Dandriyal, the advocate representing VanDyke, characterised the situation sharply:
"NIA did not find any evidence against the accused even after being granted an additional 90 days for investigation, during which time the accused remained incarcerated on fictitious UAPA charges."
The defence's argument centres on the absence of terror charges in the final filing. If the extended investigation period expires without the agency laying UAPA charges, the accused would face only the comparatively modest immigration penalties, and the question of whether the initial Section 18 arrest was justified would remain unresolved in the public record.
Broader Implications
The case sits at the intersection of India's northeastern border security concerns and its immigration enforcement framework. The northeastern states have long been a theatre of insurgent activity, and the agency's claim that Myanmar-based Ethnic Armed Groups maintain operational links with Indian insurgents gives the investigation a strategic dimension beyond a routine visa violation. The mention of drones, jamming technology, and digital devices seized during the probe suggests the NIA is treating the episode as a potential intelligence-gathering or capacity-building operation rather than a simple tourist misadventure.
For now, however, the seven accused stand charged only with immigration offences. Whether the UAPA case materialises before the extended deadline expires will determine whether this matter remains a border-crossing dispute or escalates into a full-blown terror conspiracy trial.
Related Reading
Frequently Asked Questions
What is In NIA charge sheet no terror?In NIA charge sheet no terror is the main topic of this guide. The article explains the context, practical details, and next steps readers should understand.
Why does In NIA charge sheet no terror matter?In NIA charge sheet no terror matters because readers are looking for a useful answer, not just a short summary. Good content should match search intent and help them decide what to do next.