Mumbai: Nearly 18 years after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, Mumbai Police have sought the Union Home Ministry’s assistance in using Interpol to serve court-issued proclamation orders on six Pakistani nationals accused in the case, including Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Saeed and senior operative Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi.
The move is part of India’s effort to begin trial-in-absentia proceedings against the accused, who remain outside the country and have not appeared before the Indian court. The case marks one of the first major applications of the trial-in-absentia provisions under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, in a terrorism prosecution.
Six Pakistani nationals named
The six accused against whom proclamation orders have been issued are Hafiz Saeed, Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, Sajid Mir, Abu Alqama, Asim alias Abu Qahafa and Major Abdur Rehman Pasha.
Indian investigators have alleged that the individuals played roles in planning, facilitating or directing the 2008 attacks. Police have maintained that substantial evidence has been collected linking the accused to the conspiracy behind the assault.
Mumbai Police have now asked the Union Home Ministry to use the international police cooperation mechanism to serve the court's proclamation orders on the accused in Pakistan.
Why Interpol is being used
The central problem facing Indian investigators is that the accused are not physically present in India.
Court proceedings normally require accused persons to be brought before the judicial system, but the BNSS contains provisions allowing certain proclaimed offenders who evade arrest to be tried in their absence.
Under Section 356 of the BNSS, courts can proceed against an absconding accused under specified circumstances when efforts to secure the person's presence have failed. The provision is intended to prevent criminal proceedings from remaining indefinitely stalled because an accused remains beyond the reach of Indian authorities.
The Interpol route is therefore an important procedural step. Serving the proclamation order is part of establishing that the accused have been formally notified and given an opportunity to appear before the court.
The 90-day window
Once the proclamation is properly served, the accused are expected to receive a stipulated period to appear before the court.
Reports indicate that the six accused will have 90 days to appear after the proclamation is served. If they fail to do so, the court can move forward with proceedings in their absence, subject to the requirements of the law.
This process is important because a trial in absentia is not simply an automatic conviction in the absence of an accused. The prosecution still has to establish its case through evidence and follow judicial procedures.
Evidence gathered in the 26/11 investigation
Mumbai Police have said that they possess substantial evidence concerning the accused.
The investigation into the 26/11 attacks included examination of communications, interrogation of the lone surviving attacker, forensic evidence and information relating to the attackers' handlers and support network.
The 2008 attacks involved coordinated assaults at multiple locations in Mumbai, including the Taj Mahal Palace hotel, Oberoi Trident, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus, Nariman House and other sites.
The attacks killed 166 people and injured hundreds, making them one of the most devastating terrorist attacks in India's modern history.
Kasab trial provided crucial evidence
The prosecution of Pakistani attacker Ajmal Amir Kasab, the only gunman captured alive during the attacks, became a critical component of India's investigation.
Kasab's interrogation and subsequent trial provided investigators and prosecutors with information about the attackers' training, preparation and communications with handlers based in Pakistan.
His trial was conducted in India, and he was ultimately convicted and executed in 2012.
The remaining accused, however, have remained outside India's jurisdiction, creating a long-standing obstacle to completing the wider prosecution.
Hafiz Saeed among the key accused
Hafiz Saeed is one of the most prominent names in the case.
Indian authorities have long accused Saeed, the founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba, of being involved in the planning and direction of the Mumbai attacks. He is also subject to international sanctions and has been a central figure in India's diplomatic efforts to secure accountability for the attacks.
Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi has similarly been identified by Indian investigators as a senior Lashkar-e-Taiba operative allegedly involved in the conspiracy.
The inclusion of both men in the latest proceedings gives the new legal effort considerable significance.
Earlier Interpol notices
Mumbai Police had previously used Interpol mechanisms in their efforts to locate and pursue the accused.
According to police records cited by The Times of India, Red Corner Notices were issued against several of the accused, including Saeed, Lakhvi, Sajid Mir and Major Pasha, while Blue Corner Notices were issued against Abu Qahafa and Abu Alqama.
These international notices have been part of India's broader effort to establish the whereabouts of individuals wanted in connection with the attacks.
The latest request is different in purpose: it seeks to use international police cooperation to facilitate service of the court's proclamation orders, thereby advancing the domestic judicial process.
First major use of BNSS trial-in-absentia powers
The case is particularly significant because it represents an early major test of the trial-in-absentia provisions introduced under the BNSS, which replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure in 2024.
Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam has described the provision as a mechanism intended to prevent absconding accused from indefinitely delaying justice.
For the 26/11 case, this could remove one of the biggest procedural barriers: the accused's continued absence from India.
However, the court must still ensure that the legal conditions for proceeding in their absence are satisfied.
India continues to press for accountability
The latest development comes amid India's continued diplomatic campaign against cross-border terrorism.
The Ministry of External Affairs recently said India would take “whatever action is required” to combat terrorism and urged the international community to recognise the seriousness of terrorism-related threats.
The government has repeatedly argued that those responsible for major terrorist attacks should face justice regardless of where they are located.
The 26/11 case has remained particularly sensitive because several individuals accused of involvement have remained in Pakistan for years.
A long-delayed legal process
The latest move reflects India's attempt to prevent the passage of time from permanently blocking prosecution.
For almost two decades, the case has remained partly unresolved because the alleged planners and handlers could not be brought before an Indian court.
If the proclamation orders are successfully served and the accused fail to appear within the required period, the Mumbai court could proceed with the trial in their absence.
That would not immediately resolve every legal or diplomatic difficulty, but it could allow the Indian judicial system to examine the evidence against the six accused rather than allowing their absence to indefinitely halt proceedings.
What happens next
The immediate step is for the Home Ministry and Interpol channels to facilitate service of the proclamation orders on the six accused.
After service, the prescribed period for appearance will begin. If they do not surrender or appear before the court, Mumbai Police and prosecutors can seek further action under the BNSS's trial-in-absentia framework.
The development therefore represents a significant procedural shift in one of India's most consequential terrorism cases.
Nearly 18 years after the Mumbai attacks, India is attempting to move the case into a new legal phase—one designed to ensure that accused individuals who remain beyond the country's physical reach cannot prevent the judicial process from examining the allegations against them.
Also Read: Kareena Kapoor Laughs Off Viral Pregnancy Rumours