VanDyke Case Explained: Govt Says UAPA Probe Continues Despite NIA Chargesheet (Image: Google)
Delhi: The government has clarified that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) has not closed or withdrawn its UAPA investigation against US national Matthew Aaron VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals. The clarification came after the agency filed a chargesheet under the Immigration and Foreigners Act (IFA) without mentioning UAPA provisions.
The development had triggered questions over whether terror-related charges against the accused had been dropped. However, the government said the latest chargesheet only covers offences that have already been established, while the broader UAPA investigation remains active.
Matthew Aaron VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals were arrested in March 2026 in a case registered under Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) along with other legal provisions. The accused were allegedly involved in activities related to illegal entry into Myanmar and providing drone warfare training to ethnic armed groups. Following their arrest, the case became a major security matter involving alleged foreign links and counter-terror investigations.
The controversy began after the NIA filed a chargesheet against the seven accused under the Immigration and Foreigners Act, while UAPA sections were not included in the document. The government explained that the chargesheet was filed before the expiry of the statutory custody period linked to the investigation. According to the government, the 180-day judicial custody period under the UAPA framework was nearing completion on September 8, and filing the chargesheet for established immigration-related offences was a procedural step.
The government has clearly stated: No. Officials said the NIA investigation into alleged UAPA offences is still continuing. The absence of UAPA sections in the current chargesheet does not mean that terror-related allegations have been removed. Investigating agencies can continue further investigation after filing a chargesheet and submit a supplementary chargesheet if additional evidence emerges.
The NIA’s move triggered political reactions, with the Congress questioning why UAPA provisions were missing from the chargesheet despite the case initially being registered under the anti-terror law. The party sought clarification over whether the nature of the case had changed and raised questions regarding the investigation process. The government rejected these claims, saying the chargesheet and ongoing investigation should not be treated as the same process.
The government also addressed the involvement of US officials in the case, stating that diplomatic assistance for detained citizens is a normal practice. Officials said countries regularly provide consular support to their citizens detained abroad, and India follows the same approach when Indian nationals face legal action in foreign countries. The government highlighted that consular access for foreign nationals is recognised under international agreements, including the Vienna Convention.
The government’s position is that the NIA has moved ahead with charges related to the Immigration and Foreigners Act, while the investigation into alleged UAPA offences remains open. The final outcome of the case will depend on further investigation and any additional evidence collected by the agency.
