US rights watchdog slams India for weaponizing terrorism laws to detain minorities

ISLAMABAD: The release on bail of British Sikh activist Jagtar Singh Johal after nearly nine years in Indian custody has renewed international scrutiny of New Delhi’s use of anti-terror legislation against religious minorities and activists.

The case has become a focal point for concerns over prolonged pretrial detention, alleged mistreatment in custody and the use of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), India’s principal counterterrorism law, in cases involving political and religious dissent.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) on Thursday welcomed the Delhi High Court’s decision to grant Johal bail but urged Washington to press India over other people it identifies as prisoners of freedom of religion or belief. USCIRF said Johal’s case illustrated “broader pattern” of using terrorism laws against religious minorities.

Johal was arrested in Punjab in November 2017 and faced multiple cases involving allegations including murder, conspiracy, terrorism and arms offenses. The Delhi High Court granted him bail in seven National Investigation Agency cases on September 18, 2026, after years of pretrial detention. Indian Express reported that only 40 of 123 witnesses had been examined in the cases, while proceedings had faced repeated delays.

The court’s decision does not amount to an acquittal and the cases against Johal remain pending. His bail followed an earlier acquittal in one case in March 2025, according to Indian Express.

USCIRF Chair Asif Mahmood welcomed the bail but said Johal continued to face restrictions, including surrendering his passport and a prohibition on communicating with the media. The commission also said he still faces the possibility of the death penalty on eight charges.

The commission has separately cited allegations that Johal was tortured during his detention, including claims of electric shocks, sleep deprivation and painful stress positions. Johal has said these methods were used to extract a confession. These allegations have been disputed and remain subject to legal proceedings and investigation.

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention previously examined Johal’s case and concluded that his detention was arbitrary. Its opinion raised concerns over the circumstances of his arrest, detention and the alleged use of a torture-induced confession.

The UAPA has attracted wider scrutiny because of the breadth of powers it gives investigators and the difficulties defendants can face in securing bail. Indian courts have also emphasized the importance of speedy trials in prolonged UAPA cases.

In another recent ruling, the Delhi High Court granted bail to two UAPA accused after they had spent about five years in custody while only 21 of 359 prosecution witnesses had been examined. The court noted that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon and emphasized the accused’s right to a speedy trial.

The cases have renewed questions about the balance between India’s national-security framework and constitutional protections for defendants. The Indian government maintains that counterterrorism legislation is necessary to address security threats, while critics argue that prolonged pretrial detention can effectively become punishment before guilt has been established.

USCIRF has taken a broader position on India’s treatment of religious minorities. In its August 2026 India Country Brief, the commission described “systematic, ongoing” religious-freedom violations and raised concerns about restrictions affecting faith-based organizations and alleged transnational repression.

The commission has also recommended that the State Department designate India a Country of Particular Concern, citing systematic, ongoing and egregious violations of religious freedom.

USCIRF’s assessment extends beyond the Sikh community. It has highlighted the cases of student activist Umar Khalid and academic and activist Sharjeel Imam, both of whom remain in pretrial detention in cases involving the UAPA. The commission says their cases illustrate concerns over the use of national-security legislation against people accused of participating in protests or political activity.

The issue has also gained significance beyond India’s domestic legal system. USCIRF has linked its concerns over the treatment of Sikh activists to wider allegations of transnational repression, while Canadian and US authorities have separately pursued investigations into alleged criminal networks accused of targeting Sikh activists overseas.

Johal’s bail does not end the cases against him, but his nearly nine years in custody have drawn fresh scrutiny of India’s use of counterterrorism laws. The prolonged proceedings have also raised questions about pretrial detention and the right to a speedy trial.