Congress leader Jairam Ramesh has questioned the Centre after the National Investigation Agency (NIA) did not invoke provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in its chargesheet against US national Matthew Aaron VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals.

Ramesh alleged that the decision may have followed pressure from the United States and demanded an explanation from the Narendra Modi government. He described the development as “bullying” in a post on X. 

The NIA filed its chargesheet on September 8 before a special court at Delhi’s Rouse Avenue Courts. Instead of UAPA provisions, the agency has invoked Sections 21 and 23 of the Immigration and Foreigners Act in the present chargesheet. The matter is scheduled for consideration before Special NIA Judge Prashant Sharma on October 1. 

Jairam Ramesh Questions Centre’s Decision

Reacting to the development, Ramesh questioned whether the NIA had dropped the UAPA provisions after completing its investigation or whether the agency had been pressured to do so.

He specifically linked the decision to possible intervention by US authorities and asked what India expected in return. His remarks represent the Congress leader’s political allegation; there is no independent evidence establishing that the US government pressured the NIA to alter the chargesheet. 

The Congress has therefore turned the legal development into a political issue, particularly because the case initially involved serious national-security allegations.

What the NIA Has Charged

The latest chargesheet represents a significant change from the provisions under which the case was initially registered.

The case was originally registered in March under Section 18 of the UAPA, relating to conspiracy and attempts connected with terrorist activities, along with provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. However, the September 8 chargesheet does not presently contain UAPA offences.

Instead, the NIA has proceeded under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, focusing on alleged violations relating to the entry, movement and stay of foreign nationals in India.

The agency's special public prosecutor has said the investigation is continuing. If further evidence establishes offences under the UAPA, the NIA could file a supplementary chargesheet. (The News Mill)

VanDyke and Six Ukrainians Arrested in March

VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals were arrested in March 2026 as part of an investigation into their alleged movements between India and Myanmar.

The accused Ukrainians have been identified as Petro Hurba, Taras Slyviak, Ivan Sukmanovskyi, Marian Stefankiv, Maksim Honcharuk and Viktor Kaminskyi. 

Earlier court proceedings recorded allegations that the foreign nationals travelled through India's Northeast and were linked to activities involving ethnic armed organisations in Myanmar. The NIA had also alleged that the group was involved in providing weapons-related or military training and other support.

Those allegations remain allegations and have not been established as facts by a court.

Why the UAPA Decision Matters

The UAPA is India's principal anti-terror legislation and carries significantly more serious legal consequences than ordinary immigration-related offences.

The decision not to include UAPA sections in the current chargesheet therefore changes the immediate legal character of the case. However, it does not amount to an acquittal or a judicial declaration that the original allegations were false.

The NIA has specifically retained the possibility of further legal action if its continuing investigation produces evidence supporting additional offences. 

Family Had Sought US Intervention

Before the chargesheet was filed, an X account purportedly operated by VanDyke's family had appealed for US diplomatic intervention.

The family alleged that VanDyke was being denied basic detainee rights and was being held in solitary confinement at Tihar Jail. It also maintained that he was innocent and described his previous work as involving documentation of humanitarian crises and assistance to people affected by conflict. (The News Mill)

These claims have not been independently established in the current proceedings.

Investigation Still Open

The NIA's latest filing does not close the wider investigation. The agency has indicated that additional evidence could lead to a supplementary chargesheet, including possible UAPA offences.

For the Congress, however, the change in charges has raised questions about the government's handling of a case that initially carried national-security and terrorism allegations.

The court will now examine the chargesheet and the evidence placed before it. Until judicial findings are made, the allegations against VanDyke and the six Ukrainian nationals remain subject to the legal process.

Allahabad HC Orders FIR Against Rahul Gandhi in Citizenship Case

Allahabad HC orders FIR against Rahul Gandhi as the Lucknow bench directs CBI investigation into British citizenship allegations, marking a major development in the long-running dual citizenship row.

High Court Directs FIR  

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Friday ordered the registration of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The court accepted the Uttar Pradesh government’s plea and directed that the Central Bureau of Investigation take up the case.

CBI Investigation Directed  

Counsel for the state government argued strongly that the matter required a CBI probe. The judge agreed and ordered the agency to investigate the British citizenship allegations once the FIR is registered by police.

Evidence Presented in Court  

Petitioner Vignesh Shishir told the court that the affidavit and supporting documents could prove vital. He claimed the papers show Rahul Gandhi may have acted as a voter in the United Kingdom and taken part in elections there. The bench will now verify the claims.

Confidential Documents Reviewed  

Justice Subhash Vidyarthi asked the Foreigners Division of the Union Home Ministry to produce all relevant records. Officials submitted the complete set of files, including confidential and top-secret documents, before the High Court in open proceedings.

Lower Court Order Overturned  

The petition challenged the January 28, 2026 order of the Special MP-MLA magistrate. That court had refused to direct the Kotwali police station in Rae Bareli to register an FIR. The High Court set aside the earlier decision and cleared the way for fresh action.

Serious Charges Sought  

The plea seeks action under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 along with the Official Secrets Act 1923, the Passport Act 1967 and the Foreigners Act 1946. The petitioner argued that the issues touch upon national security and citizenship rules.

National Security at Stake  

This is the first time the matter has received detailed hearing at the High Court level. The Union Home Ministry formally placed its stand on record during the proceedings. Officials indicated that the CBI will begin its work immediately after the FIR is lodged.

The ruling has triggered fresh debate on citizenship norms for public representatives. Political observers are watching closely to see how the investigation proceeds. The case is being followed as a key public interest story in the latest news today.

With the Allahabad HC orders FIR against Rahul Gandhi now active, the outcome of the CBI probe will decide the next steps in this high-profile matter that continues to draw national attention.