Gujarat government operationalises Anti-Radicalisation Cell: Read how The Wire made baseless allegations that the new SOP targets Muslims
· OpIndia
The Gujarat government has formally moved ahead with the operationalisation of its Anti-Radicalisation Cell (ARC), with the Gujarat State Police Service (SPS) circulating a detailed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to district and commissionerate offices across the state. On Tuesday, 14th July, the communication, issued by the State Intelligence Bureau from Gandhinagar and signed by D.C.I. (C) Praful Vaniya with the approval of the competent authority, was forwarded to police units across Gujarat for implementation.
Visit tr-sport.bond for more information.
The circular [pdf] sent to district Superintendents of Police and senior range officers stated that the newly established ARC would begin functioning in coordination with local police units, prison authorities, Special Operations Groups (SOG), and State Intelligence Bureau officers. Along with the SOP, the state government also circulated monthly reporting formats that district units would be required to submit to the Intelligence Headquarters by the fifth day of every month.
The move comes months after the Gujarat Home Department approved the creation of more than a hundred new posts for the ARC structure across district and commissionerate offices as part of the 2026-27 service year.
Gujarat government creates a dedicated anti-radicalisation framework
According to the official communication, the Gujarat Home Department approved the creation of 136 new posts across various cadres for establishing the Anti-Radicalisation Cell network throughout the state. Recruitment and deployment for these positions are currently underway.
The ARC has been tasked with preventing the spread of extremist ideologies, identifying individuals vulnerable to radicalisation, carrying out counselling and de-radicalisation interventions, facilitating rehabilitation, and ensuring that individuals do not relapse into extremist networks.
The SOP defines a “radicalised person” as an individual who, driven by extremist ideologies, engages in anti-national activities, attempts to damage the unity and integrity of the country, spreads fear among citizens, or seeks to influence others into accepting extremist beliefs. The document also refers to individuals who attempt to promote hostility towards members of other faiths or propagate the idea that only their religion is correct while others are wrong.
Officials say the framework is intended to provide district police officers with a structured mechanism to detect early warning signs and intervene before individuals become involved in criminal or terrorist activities.
Five-stage model: Prevention, Detection, Intervention, Rehabilitation and Monitoring
The SOP lays out a five-stage model for dealing with radicalisation.
The first stage, termed “Prevention”, focuses on monitoring online spaces and preventing the spread of extremist propaganda. Police units have been instructed to monitor social media platforms, online forums, messaging applications and suspicious networks where extremist content may be circulated.
Screengrab of SOPThe document specifically calls for monitoring extremist preachers, communal organisations, radicalised prisoners and individuals linked to extremist ideologies. It also mentions maintaining vigilance on influencers associated with Salafi and Wahhabi schools of thought that investigators believe may be exploited by radical networks for recruitment purposes.
District units have additionally been directed to develop intelligence sources in vulnerable areas and maintain close contact with local communities to identify potential threats at an early stage.
The second stage, “Detection”, lays down behavioural, financial and digital indicators that officers should take into account while identifying possible cases of radicalisation.
Screengrab of SOPAmong the behavioural indicators mentioned in the SOP are sudden Suddenly growing a beard, wearing a niqab, frequent use of Arabic words, reducing contact with friends and family, expressing intense protest against global events affecting the Muslim community, glorifying terrorists, or exhibiting altered behaviour following foreign travel to conflict-prone regions.
The document also lists certain suspicious activities that may warrant closer scrutiny in conjunction with other intelligence inputs, including procurement of explosive precursors such as ammonium nitrate or potassium nitrate, unexplained visits to isolated locations, frequent communication with individuals located in conflict zones or terror-affected regions, and unusual cash withdrawals.
On the digital front, the SOP asks officers to monitor the use of encrypted communication platforms, participation in extremist online groups, dissemination of extremist propaganda material, and unexplained use of cryptocurrencies by individuals lacking any visible source of income.
The ARC has also been directed to maintain records of radical elements, open dossiers on identified individuals, update those dossiers on a monthly basis and preserve records of criminal cases registered against such persons.
Focus on counselling and reintegration
Unlike purely punitive counter-terror approaches, the Gujarat ARC SOP devotes considerable space to counselling and rehabilitation.
Under the “Intervention” phase, district authorities have been directed to identify influential community leaders, religious scholars, psychologists, educators, social media influencers and non-governmental organisations who could assist in de-radicalisation efforts.
The SOP recommends counselling sessions involving family members, religious experts, psychiatrists and trained departmental personnel. It also specifically mandates that the identity of individuals undergoing counselling be kept confidential.
Authorities have further been instructed to facilitate the return of such individuals to education or employment opportunities and maintain regular contact with them following intervention.
However, the document clarifies that if an individual proceeds to commit or prepare for a cognisable offence despite counselling and intervention efforts, legal action must be initiated under relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).
The fourth phase of the framework focuses on rehabilitation and reintegration through seminars, community policing programmes, sports competitions, skill development initiatives and job fairs.
The final stage involves long-term monitoring of individuals who have undergone de-radicalisation programmes to prevent re-radicalisation. Monthly activity reports are to be maintained initially, with periodic monitoring continuing thereafter.
Monthly reporting system introduced
The SOP has also introduced a detailed reporting structure for district ARC units.
Police authorities will now have to provide monthly data on counselling sessions conducted, the number of individuals undergoing de-radicalisation programmes, new dossiers opened during the month, criminal cases registered against radical elements, seminars and awareness programmes organised, and lecture sessions held in educational or religious institutions.
District units have also been directed to report social media interventions carried out to counter extremist narratives, as well as details of objectionable content identified online and the action taken against such activity.
The Wire raises objections, alleging targeting of Muslims
Soon after details of the SOP surfaced on social media, leftist rag The Wire published a report sharply criticising the guidelines and alleging that the framework disproportionately focuses on Islamist radicalisation while remaining silent on other forms of extremism. The article titled, “For Gujarat Police, Beard, Niqab Make ‘Radicalisation’ Checklist, Cow Vigilantism Doesn’t”
The publication argued that several indicators mentioned in the document, including keeping a beard, wearing a niqab, using Arabic words frequently or undertaking religious practices such as Itikaf, could lead to ordinary Muslims being viewed with suspicion.
Quoting Surat resident Firuz Khan, The Wire wrote: “Should we shave our beards, start punishing ourselves for being born Muslim?”
The publication further argued that the SOP conflates religious identity with security concerns and questioned why the document specifically refers to travel to Afghanistan or the Middle East, the use of encrypted messaging applications such as Signal and Element, and interaction with certain religious institutions or scholars.
The report also criticised the inclusion of instructions requiring police officers to maintain records of madrasa teachers and ascertain whether they have links with extremist organisations.
According to The Wire, the SOP appears “designed to penalise common Muslims” and does not contain similar indicators relating to what it described as “Hindu radicalism” or cow vigilante violence witnessed in different parts of the country over the years.
The publication additionally reported that Gujarat-based journalist Sahal Qureshi claimed he had been warned by police officials after his social media posts about the SOP gained traction online. According to the report, he alleged that he was asked to remove the posts because they could potentially disturb communal harmony in the state.
ARC traces its origins to earlier de-radicalisation discussions
Although the Gujarat ARC formally took shape only recently, the idea itself is not new.
The concept of dedicated de-radicalisation mechanisms gained prominence nationally during a conference of Directors General and Inspectors General of Police held in Gujarat’s Rann of Kutch in 2015, where Telangana Police’s de-radicalisation model was discussed as a possible template for other states.
The issue reportedly came up again during subsequent conferences of senior police officers attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah.
The BJP later included the establishment of an Anti-Radicalisation Cell in its Gujarat Assembly election manifesto and initiated groundwork for its implementation. A task force involving police officials, anti-terror experts and academics was reportedly constituted to study the issue and prepare an institutional framework.
After administrative approvals and budgetary allocations were secured earlier this year, the ARC structure was finally operationalised, culminating in the circulation of the SOP to district units.
Conclusion
With the issuance of the SOP and the creation of dedicated personnel positions, Gujarat has become one of the few states to establish a formal, state-wide anti-radicalisation framework that combines intelligence gathering, counselling, rehabilitation and long-term monitoring under a single mechanism.
While the leftist propaganda outlet alleged that the indicators listed in the SOP disproportionately affect Muslims, the document itself does not identify any particular community as inherently radical or subject to special scrutiny. Instead, the ARC framework is aimed at individuals who engage in or promote extremist ideologies, anti-national activities, religious supremacism, violent mobilisation or attempts to radicalise others, irrespective of their identity.
Many of the behavioural and digital indicators mentioned in the SOP, including glorification of terrorists, association with extremist organisations, participation in online propaganda networks, use of encrypted communication channels by extremist groups, foreign links with conflict regions, and sudden behavioural changes accompanying radicalisation, have featured in several terror investigations and de-radicalisation cases handled by security agencies in India and abroad over the years.
The Gujarat Police SOP seeks to incorporate such patterns into an early-warning framework rather than wait for individuals to graduate from extremist sympathies to criminal action.
The criticism that the document does not mention cow vigilantism or so-called “Hindu radicalism” also overlooks the fact that the ARC SOP operates within a specific definition of radicalisation laid down in the document itself.
The framework is designed around identifying organised ideological radicalisation, extremist recruitment, and pathways that may culminate in terrorism or anti-national activities. Offences arising out of vigilantism, mob violence or communal clashes continue to fall under existing criminal laws and policing mechanisms unless they meet the criteria laid down under the ARC definition.