In a bold and precedent-setting move, authorities in Jammu’s Kathua district have taken the fight against anti-national elements beyond arrests and into the realm of financial disruption. Land worth several crores of rupees—belonging to seven individuals based in Pakistan—has been officially attached under stringent anti-terror laws. The action, confirmed by senior police officials on January 3, 2026, marks one of the most significant asset seizures in the region under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Enemy Property (Custody and Registration) Order, 1965—commonly known as the EIMCO Act .
This isn’t just about reclaiming land; it’s a strategic strike at the economic lifelines that may support hostile activities targeting India. In a region long vulnerable to cross-border infiltration and proxy warfare, the UAPA property attachment Kathua case signals a new phase in India’s counter-terrorism playbook: follow the money, freeze the assets, and deny adversaries any foothold—even on paper.
Table of Contents
- The Kathua Case: What Happened?
- UAPA Property Attachment Kathua: Legal Mechanisms Used
- Who Are the Accused? Pakistan-Based Owners
- Why This Matters: Targeting the Financial Ecosystem of Terrorism
- Broader Trend: UAPA and Asset Seizure in India
- Challenges and Criticisms of Asset Attachment
- Conclusion: A New Front in India’s Security Strategy
- Sources
The Kathua Case: What Happened?
Acting on intelligence inputs and ongoing investigations, the Kathua Police—under the Jammu and Kashmir Police—initiated proceedings to attach immovable property located within their jurisdiction. The land, described as “prime agricultural and residential plots,” is legally registered in the names of seven individuals who currently reside in Pakistan .
While the identities of the accused have not been fully disclosed for operational reasons, police confirm that formal cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Enemy Property (Custody and Registration) Order, 1965 (EIMCO Act) have been registered against them. The attachment order, now enforced, prevents any sale, transfer, or use of the properties until further legal resolution .
Senior officers emphasized that the move “underscores the police’s unwavering commitment to combating unlawful and anti-national activities,” particularly those with cross-border dimensions .
UAPA Property Attachment Kathua: Legal Mechanisms Used
The seizure leverages two powerful legal instruments:
- Section 25 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967: Allows the government to seize or attach any property suspected of being used to fund or facilitate terrorist acts, even if the owner is abroad.
- The Enemy Property (Custody and Registration) Order, 1965 (EIMCO Act): Empowers the Custodian of Enemy Property for India to take control of assets belonging to individuals or entities from “enemy states”—a designation that still includes Pakistan in certain legal contexts .
Together, these laws create a formidable framework for denying economic safe havens to those accused of threatening India’s sovereignty. The attached properties will now be managed by the state, with potential for permanent confiscation if guilt is established in court.
[INTERNAL_LINK:uapa-explained-legal-powers-and-controversies] This dual-act approach is increasingly common in border districts like Kathua, where historical land ownership by cross-border families creates legal gray zones exploited by malign actors.
Who Are the Accused? Pakistan-Based Owners
While full details remain under wraps, sources indicate the seven individuals are not random citizens but persons with alleged historical or operational links to anti-India networks. Some are believed to be descendants of families that migrated to Pakistan during or after Partition but retained property titles in Jammu—a common scenario in border districts.
Indian authorities suspect these properties may have been used to:
- Fund local operatives or sympathizers.
- Provide logistical cover for smuggling or communication.
- Serve as symbolic “stakes” in Indian soil to sustain claims or influence.
Critically, the accused are being prosecuted in absentia, as they reside beyond Indian jurisdiction. This makes asset attachment one of the few viable tools to hold them accountable.
Why This Matters: Targeting the Financial Ecosystem of Terrorism
Counter-terrorism experts have long argued that disrupting financing is as crucial as neutralizing operatives. As the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) notes, “Terrorism cannot survive without money” .
By attaching these assets, Kathua Police are sending a clear deterrent message: even if you orchestrate anti-national acts from across the border, your economic interests in India are not safe. This aligns with global best practices, including those of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which urges member states to criminalize terror financing and enable asset forfeiture.
Broader Trend: UAPA and Asset Seizure in India
The Kathua case is part of a nationwide escalation in the use of UAPA for financial disruption. In recent years:
- The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has attached properties worth over ₹200 crore linked to PFI (Popular Front of India) members.
- In J&K, more than 50 properties have been seized since 2020 under anti-terror laws.
- The Enforcement Directorate (ED) routinely collaborates with state police to trace and freeze terror-linked assets under PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) .
This trend reflects a strategic shift—from reactive policing to proactive financial warfare against networks that threaten national security.
Challenges and Criticisms of Asset Attachment
Despite its effectiveness, the practice isn’t without controversy. Human rights groups have raised concerns about:
- Due process**: Properties can be attached based on suspicion, with the burden of proof shifting to the owner.
- Impact on innocent heirs**: In some cases, distant relatives with no involvement may lose inherited land.
- Political misuse**: Critics allege UAPA is sometimes weaponized against dissenters, though the Kathua case appears firmly rooted in cross-border security threats .
Nonetheless, in high-risk zones like Kathua—just 25 km from the International Border—the state prioritizes security over procedural leniency.
Conclusion: A New Front in India’s Security Strategy
The UAPA property attachment Kathua case is far more than a local administrative order. It represents a sophisticated, financially focused dimension of India’s national security strategy—one that recognizes that land, money, and influence are weapons in modern asymmetric warfare. By seizing these assets, authorities aren’t just punishing the accused; they’re dismantling the infrastructure that sustains anti-national activity at its roots.
As India continues to refine its counter-terrorism toolkit, expect more such actions—not just in Jammu and Kashmir, but wherever enemies seek to embed their interests in Indian soil.
Sources
- Times of India: “Property of 7 people accused in UAPA attached in Kathua” (January 3, 2026)
- J&K Police official press release on property attachment.
- Ministry of Home Affairs: “The Enemy Property Act – Guidelines and Implementation”
- United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC): “Terrorist Financing and Organized Crime”
- National Investigation Agency (NIA) Annual Report 2025.
- Amnesty International India: Reports on UAPA usage (contextual reference for debate).