NEW DELHI: An Indian court in New Delhi has issued a non-bailable warrant against former RAW officer Vikash Yadav, who was named by the US in a “murder-for-hire” plot and money laundering targeting New York-based Sikh leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, due to his absence in a case of alleged kidnapping and extortion.
The order, passed by Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Partap Singh Laler of Patiala House Courts, noted that Yadav was absent “despite repeated calls.” The court directed that non-bailable warrants be issued and a notice be served to his surety, setting the next hearing for October 17.
According to The Indian Express, court records indicate that a member of Yadav’s family had stood surety in the case. Yadav had previously been granted an exemption from court appearances following applications submitted by his lawyer.
The case against Yadav has gained attention due to his reported involvement in a separate high-profile international investigation.
In November 2023, US prosecutors charged Indian national Nikhil Gupta with attempting to assassinate Sikh separatist leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun. Gupta was allegedly acting under the direction of an unnamed Indian government official referred to as “CC-1.”
Just weeks later, on December 18, 2023, Delhi Police’s Special Cell arrested Yadav in a separate case of kidnapping and extortion, based on a complaint from a resident of Rohini, Delhi.
He was released on bail in April 2024 after spending four months in Tihar Jail, and his current whereabouts remain unknown.
In October 2024, US authorities unsealed a second superseding indictment, naming “CC-1” as Vikash Yadav and describing him as an official with the Cabinet Secretariat under the Indian Prime Minister’s Office. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs later clarified that Yadav was “no longer an employee of the government of India.”
Just days before Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration in 2025, India’s Ministry of Home Affairs announced that a high-powered government committee had recommended “legal action” against “an individual”—a move widely seen as connected to the growing scrutiny around Yadav.
