Content

1. National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS)
2. DPDP Act, 2023 vs RTI Act, 2005 — Attorney-General’s Opinion
3. Assam’s Pride: Golden Langur Losing Its Only Home
4. The Mountain Monarch: Nilgiri Tahr in the Western Ghats
5. Pesticides Management Bill, 2025: Revised Draft, Old Gaps Persist
6. Only 67 Cities Covered under the National Clean Air Programme
7. Drugs Problem Is Narco-Terrorism, Not a Mere Issue of Crime

---

National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS).

---

Why in News?

• Union Home Minister Amit Shah inaugurated the National Improvised Explosive Device Data Management System (NIDMS).
• It is a first-of-its-kind national database documenting all bomb blast / IED incidents in India since 1999.
• Aimed at strengthening counter-terrorism investigations, trend analysis, and predictive policing.

Relevance

GS III – Internal Security

• Terrorism and insurgency
• Use of technology in security management
• Intelligence sharing and coordination

GS II – Governance

• Role of Union Home Ministry
• Cooperative federalism in policing
• Institutional capacity building

What is NIDMS?

• NIDMS (National IED Data Management System):
  • A secure national digital platform.
  • Houses comprehensive data on bomb blasts and IED incidents across India.
  • Designed for systematic collection, standardisation, integration, and sharing of blast-related data.

Institutional Framework

• Nodal Agency:
  • National Security Guard (NSG)
• Operational Hub:
  • National Bomb Data Centre (NBDC), NSG
  • Headquarters: Manesar, Haryana
• Primary Role of NSG:
  • Lead force for post-blast analysis in India.

Coverage & Scale 

• Temporal coverage:
  • All IED / bomb blast incidents since 1999.
• User agencies:
  • State Police forces
  • Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs)
  • Central investigating and anti-terror agencies
• Nature of access:
  • Single-click access to previously scattered case-file data.

Key Features of NIDMS

End of Data Silos

• Earlier:
  • Explosion-related data existed across multiple agencies and case files.
• Now:
  • Integrated into one centralised national repository.

Signature Linking of Incidents

• System can establish linkages between multiple blasts based on:
  • Location
  • Type of explosion
  • Explosive material
  • Circuit and timer design
• Example cited:
  • Same delayed circuit timer used in:
    • Rameswaram café blast (March 2024)
    • Mangaluru blast (2022)

AI-Enabled Analysis

• Home Ministry aims to:
  • Connect multiple internal data sources.
  • Use advanced AI-based software for:
    • Pattern detection
    • Modus operandi analysis
    • Predictive assessment of future threats.

Predictive & Preventive Capability

• Enables:
  • Identification of repeat signatures.
  • Mapping of terror networks and bomb-makers.
  • Anticipation of emerging trends in IED design and deployment.

Strategic Significance

Counter-Terrorism

• Helps:
  • Investigate terrorist incidents across States.
  • Establish inter-State and inter-incident linkages.
• Strengthens India’s intelligence-led counter-terror framework.

Federal Coordination

• Common platform for:
  • Centre–State cooperation.
  • Information symmetry across police forces.
• Reduces duplication and investigation delays.

Evidence-Based Security Policy

• Supports:
  • Trend analysis of explosives used.
  • Shifts in terrorist tactics.
• Enables data-driven formulation of counter-terror strategies.

Governance & Technology Angle

• Reflects shift towards:
  • Digital governance in internal security
  • AI-supported law enforcement
• Aligns with:
  • National security modernisation
  • Smart policing initiatives.

---

DPDP Act, 2023 vs RTI Act, 2005 — Attorney-General’s Opinion

---

Why in News?

• Attorney-General of India, R. Venkataramani, in a written opinion, stated that the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023 does not dilute the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
• Comes amid criticism from civil society and transparency advocates after the Centre notified amendments to RTI in November 2025 via the DPDP Act.
• Core dispute: Whether amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of RTI weakens transparency by expanding the “personal information” exemption.

Relevance

GS II – Polity & Governance

• Transparency vs privacy
• Role of Attorney-General
• Accountability mechanisms

GS IV – Ethics

• Public interest vs individual privacy
• Discretion and ethical decision-making by public authorities

Legal & Policy Background

RTI Act, 2005

• Enacted to operationalise Article 19(1)(a) (Right to know).
• Section 8(1) lists exemptions from disclosure.
• Section 8(2) provides an override clause allowing disclosure if public interest outweighs harm.

DPDP Act, 2023

• Enacted to protect informational privacy under Article 21, following Puttaswamy (2017).
• Amended RTI Act’s Section 8(1)(j) relating to personal information.

What Changed in Section 8(1)(j)?

Earlier Position (Pre-DPDP)

• Personal information could be disclosed if:
  • It had a relationship to public activity/interest, or
  • Larger public interest justified disclosure.
• Included a key proviso:
  • Information not denied to Parliament could not be denied to citizens.

Post-DPDP Amendment

• Language simplified to exempt “personal information” without explicitly mentioning:
  • Public activity linkage
  • Parliamentary disclosure proviso
• Triggered concerns of a blanket exemption.

Attorney-General’s Opinion

1. No Dilution of RTI

• AG argues:
  • Section 8(2) of RTI Act remains untouched.
  • This section mandates disclosure of even exempt information if public interest outweighs harm.
• Hence, transparency safeguards still exist.

2. Balance Between Privacy and Transparency

• DPDP Act provides a legal framework to balance:
  • Right to Privacy (Article 21)
  • Right to Information (Article 19(1)(a))
• Explicitly aligned with Supreme Court’s Puttaswamy judgment (2017).

3. Harmonious Construction

• RTI exemptions must be read with Section 8(2), not in isolation.
• CPIOs and appellate authorities retain discretion to disclose in public interest.

Government’s Stand  

• RTI amendment notified November 2025, even as:
  • Other DPDP provisions were given 12–18 months for implementation.
• Centre maintains:
  • No reduction in accountability.
  • Only clarification to avoid misuse of personal data.

Concerns Raised by Critics

Transparency Advocates’ Arguments

• Removal of explicit public interest language in Section 8(1)(j):
  • May lead to over-cautious denial by officials.
• Parliamentary proviso omission:
  • Weakens a key democratic safeguard.
• Practical risk:
  • Information on assets, appointments, disciplinary actions may be denied citing privacy.

Constitutional Dimension

• Article 19(1)(a): Right to Information (derived).
• Article 21: Right to Privacy (Puttaswamy, 2017).
• AG’s view:
  • DPDP Act restores constitutional balance, not hierarchy.

Implications for Governance

Positive

• Stronger personal data protection regime.
• Reduced arbitrary disclosure of private data.
• Compliance with global data protection standards.

Risks

• Chilling effect on RTI usage.
• Increased discretion at CPIO level.
• Potential dilution unless Section 8(2) is robustly applied.

Key Data & Facts for Mains Enrichment

• RTI Act enacted: 2005
• DPDP Act enacted: 2023
• RTI amendment notified: November 2025
• Landmark case: K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)

---

Assam’s Pride: Golden Langur Losing Its Only Home

---

Why in News?

• Recent article highlights rapid habitat fragmentation threatening the Golden Langur, a globally rare primate endemic only to Assam (India) and Bhutan.
• Raises concerns over:
  • Infrastructure-led habitat loss
  • Genetic isolation
  • Long-term survival of an endemic species
• Fits into broader debates on:
  • Biodiversity conservation
  • Human–wildlife conflict
  • Community-led conservation models

Relevance

GS III – Environment & Biodiversity

• Endemic species conservation
• Habitat fragmentation
• Human–wildlife conflict

What is the Golden Langur?

Taxonomy & Identity

• Common name: Gee’s Golden Langur
• Scientific name: Trachypithecus geei
• Group: Old World monkeys
• Identified as a distinct species by Zoological Survey of India, based on documentation by Edward Pritchard Gee (1964).
• The IUCN Red List lists the golden langur as Endangered

Geographic Distribution

• Endemic range:
  • Western Assam
  • Foothills of Bhutan’s Black Mountains
• Natural boundaries:
  • Manas River (east)
  • Sankosh River (west)
• Altitudinal range:
  • 100–1,500 metres (subtropical Himalayan foothills)

Population Status

• Estimated population in Assam:
  • ~7,400 individuals
  • Source: Global Ecology and Conservation (2024)
• One of the rarest and most threatened primates globally.

Habitat & Ecology

Habitat Type

• Subtropical broadleaf forests:
  • Moist evergreen
  • Semi-evergreen
  • Riverine forests
• Strictly arboreal:
  • Depends on continuous tall forest canopy.

Behaviour & Social Structure

• Group size:
  • Average 8 individuals
• Social system:
  • One male, multiple females, juveniles
• Behaviour:
  • Shy
  • Avoids human contact

Physical Characteristics 

• Long, silky coat with golden to silvery-white sheen.
• Seasonal colour variation:
  • Males darker golden
  • Females and juveniles lighter
• Distinct features:
  • Black face
  • Pale beard
  • Crown hair whorl
  • Tail length often >1 metre

Cultural Significance

• Known and revered by:
  • Bodo community (considered descendant of a mythical monkey king)
  • Rabha community
• Bodoland Territorial Council:
  • Golden langur is the official mascot
• Cultural reverence has enabled community protection.

Key Threats

1. Habitat Fragmentation

• Causes:
  • Roads
  • Power transmission lines
  • Forest clearance
• Results in:
  • Isolated forest patches
  • Disrupted canopy continuity

2. Direct Mortality Factors

• Electrocution from overhead power lines
• Roadkill (especially near highways)
• Dog attacks near villages and plantations

3. Genetic Risks

• Fragmentation restricts gene flow.
• Leads to:
  • Inbreeding
  • Reduced genetic diversity
  • Long-term population decline

Conservation Efforts  

Protected Areas

• Chakrashila Wildlife Sanctuary
• Raimona National Park
• Kakoijana Reserved Forest
• Parts of Manas National Park
• Fragmented patches in Kokrajhar & Dhubri districts

Community-Based Conservation

• Local groups:
  • Patrol forests
  • Prevent timber smuggling
  • Plant native tree species
• Example areas:
  • Chakrashila
  • Kakoijana

Infrastructure Mitigation

• Canopy bridges:
  • 4 bridges constructed over NH-117 (Bongaigaon)
  • Enable safe arboreal movement
  • Reduce roadkill and electrocution

What Needs to Be Done

• Restore forest corridors:
  • Reconnect fragmented habitats across Assam and Bhutan
• Wildlife-sensitive infrastructure planning:
  • Underground cabling in key habitats
  • Mandatory canopy crossings
• Transboundary conservation:
  • India–Bhutan coordination
• Strengthen community stewardship:
  • Incentives for conservation
  • Recognition of indigenous knowledge

---

The Mountain Monarch: Nilgiri Tahr in the Western Ghats  

---

Why in News?

• New 2025 joint survey by Kerala & Tamil Nadu Forest Departments estimates Nilgiri tahr population at 2,668 individuals, indicating cautious recovery.
• Revival linked to:
  • Project Tahr (Tamil Nadu, 2023)
  • Grassland restoration and habitat connectivity efforts.
• At the same time, article warns recovery is fragile due to climate change, invasive species and habitat fragmentation.

Relevance

GS Paper III – Environment & Biodiversity

• Endemic species conservation
• Shola–grassland ecosystems
• Invasive species management
• Climate change impacts on fauna

GS Paper I – Culture & Geography

• Sangam literature
• Tribal ecological knowledge
• Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot

What is the Nilgiri Tahr?

Identity & Taxonomy

• Common name: Nilgiri tahr
• Scientific name: Nilgiritragus hylocrius
• Category: Mountain ungulate (goat-antelope)
• Endemic to the Western Ghats (India only)
• The Nilgiri Tahr (Nilgiritragus hylocrius) is listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List

Geographic Distribution 

• Habitat:
  • Shola–grassland ecosystems of the Western Ghats.
• Elevation:
  • Typically above 1,200 metres, prefers cliffs and alpine grasslands.
• Major landscapes:
  • Eravikulam
  • Anamalai
  • Mukurthi
  • Silent Valley
  • Glenmorgan
• Present only in:
  • Kerala and Tamil Nadu

Cultural & Historical Significance

• Mentioned in:
  • Tamil Sangam literature (Kurinji landscape) as varayãdu.
  • Epics like Silappathikaram.
• Tribal knowledge:
  • Toda, Badaga, Kota, Muthuvan tribes.
  • Tahr tracks used to:
    • Navigate fog
    • Locate springs
    • Identify safe mountain passes.
• Symbol:
  • Endurance, survival, mountain wisdom.

Physical & Ecological Adaptations

• Stocky, sure-footed body adapted to steep cliffs.
• Curved horns; males have silvery “saddleback” patch.
• Diet:
  • Generalist feeder
  • Consumes 120+ plant species:
    • Grasses
    • Herbs
    • Shrubs
    • Legumes
    • Some trees.
• Ecological role:
  • Maintains grassland structure
  • Nutrient recycling
  • Supports predator populations.

Population Status – Key Data

• Total population: 2,668
• Kerala:
  • ~1,365 individuals
  • Eravikulam National Park: 841 (largest, most secure population)
• Tamil Nadu:
  • ~1,303 individuals
• Indicates recovery after decades of decline.

Why Did the Tahr Decline Earlier?

1. Habitat Loss & Fragmentation

• Conversion of grasslands for:
  • Agriculture
  • Tourism infrastructure
• Reduced continuous shola–grassland mosaics.

2. Invasive Species

• Spread of:
  • Wattle
  • Eucalyptus
• Suppressed native grasses essential for tahr grazing.

3. Climate Change

• Rising temperatures pushing tahrs:
  • To higher elevations
  • Into smaller habitat zones.

4. Ecological Risks

• Fragmented populations led to:
  • Genetic isolation
  • Disease vulnerability
  • Reduced resilience.

Conservation Turnaround: What Changed?

1. Project Tahr (Tamil Nadu, 2023)

• Declared Nilgiri tahr as Tamil Nadu’s State Animal.
• Budget: ₹25.14 crore.
• Focus areas:
  • Grassland restoration
  • Invasive species removal
  • Long-term population monitoring.

2. Grassland Restoration

• Revival of native grasses:
  • Chrysopogon zeylanicus
  • Tripogon wightii
• Enhances forage quality and soil fertility.

3. Community Integration

• Collaboration with Muthuvan tribe:
  • Mapping migration routes
  • Identifying feeding grounds
• Use of indigenous ecological knowledge.

4. Kerala’s Parallel Efforts

• Active conservation in:
  • Eravikulam National Park
  • Silent Valley National Park
• Protection of core breeding populations.

Advanced Conservation Strategies (Current)

1. Translocation (Planned)

• Kerala considering relocation to:
  • Suitable but under-occupied habitats.
• Includes:
  • Habitat assessment
  • Forage improvement
  • Soft-release protocols.

2. Habitat Connectivity

• Mapping wildlife corridors across:
  • Mukurthi
  • Anamalai
  • Glenmorgan
  • Eravikulam
• Aim:
  • Restore genetic exchange
  • Reduce isolation.

Key Concerns Going Forward

• Translocation risks if:
  • Habitats are not ecologically stable.
• Climate change may:
  • Shrink high-altitude grasslands further.
• Conservation success depends on:
  • Landscape-level restoration, not isolated protection.

---

Pesticides Management Bill, 2025: Revised Draft, Old Gaps Persist

---

Why in News?

• Union Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare released a revised draft of the Pesticides Management Bill, 2025 on January 7, 2026.
• Bill seeks to replace the Insecticides Act, 1968 and its Rules framed over 50 years ago.
• Despite revisions, experts and civil society argue core regulatory and accountability gaps remain unaddressed.
• Public comments invited till February 2, 2026.

Relevance

GS Paper III – Environment & Agriculture

• Pesticide regulation
• Environmental health
• Sustainable agriculture

GS Paper II – Governance

• Regulatory institutions
• Centre–State relations
• Accountability mechanisms

Background & Evolution 

• 1968: Insecticides Act enacted.
• 2008: First attempt to replace the Act.
• 2018: New Bill introduced.
• 2020: Revised Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha → referred to Parliamentary Standing Committee.
• 2025: Fresh draft released with limited changes.

What the Bill Seeks to Do ?

• Regulate:
  • Manufacture
  • Import
  • Sale
  • Distribution
  • Use of pesticides
• Aim (as per draft language):
  • To “strive to minimise risk to humans, animals, non-target organisms, and the environment”.
• Promote:
  • Transparency
  • Traceability
  • Farmer-centric regulation
  • Biological and traditional-knowledge-based pesticides.

Key Structural Changes in 2025 Draft

• Clauses reduced:
  • From 65 (2020 draft) → 55 (2025 draft).
• Government claims:
  • Simplification
  • Ease of compliance.
• Critics argue:
  • Weaker language, not stronger safeguards.

Major Concerns & Gaps 

1. Weak Role of State Governments

• States cannot permanently ban pesticides.
• Powers limited to:
  • Temporary prohibition (max 1 year).
• Final decision rests with:
  • Registration Committee (Union-controlled).
• Implication:
  • States remain administrative implementers, not regulators.

2. Centralised Regulatory Architecture

Registration Committee

• Constituted by Union Government.
• Members include:
  • Drugs Controller General of India
  • ICAR
  • MoEFCC
  • Dept. of Chemicals & Petrochemicals
  • Plant Protection Advisor
• Reviews state prohibitions and decides continuation.

Issue:

• Over-centralisation.
• Weak cooperative federalism in agriculture (State subject).

3. Central Pesticides Board – Advisory, Not Binding

• Functions:
  • Recommend pesticides for inclusion.
  • Frame:
    • Good Manufacturing Practices
    • Recall procedures
    • Disposal norms
    • SOPs for poisoning cases.
• Problem:
  • Functions not embedded as enforceable legal provisions.
  • Similar to 2020 draft → no strengthening.

4. Absence of Criminal Liability

• No explicit provision for:
  • Criminal liability of manufacturers, distributors, marketers.
• Critical gaps in cases of:
  • Pesticide misuse for suicides.
  • Deliberate poisoning of lakes and water bodies.
• Weakens deterrence against corporate misconduct.

5. Diluted Environmental & Health Safeguards

• Language shift:
  • From “minimise risk” → “strive to minimise risk”.
• Seen as:
  • Lowering regulatory obligation.
  • Creating ambiguity in enforcement.
• Flagged by organisations like Pesticide Action Network (PAN) India.

6. No Price Regulation Mechanism

• Bill silent on:
  • Price control of pesticides.
• Concern:
  • Farmers vulnerable to exploitation.
  • Contradiction with “farmer-centric” claim.

7. Accountability & Redressal Deficit

• No robust:
  • Compensation mechanism
  • Liability framework
  • Farmer grievance redressal authority.
• Weak enforcement against:
  • Spurious pesticides
  • Fake seeds (raised by Agriculture Minister in 2025).

Government’s Justification

• Describes Bill as:
  • “Farmer-centric legislation”.
• Focus on:
  • Ease of living
  • Transparency
  • Traceability.
• Context:
  • Month-long farmer complaints campaign (2025) highlighted spurious pesticides.

Federalism & Governance Angle

• Agriculture is a State subject (Entry 14, State List).
• Bill reinforces:
  • Central dominance in regulation and prohibition.
• Raises questions on:
  • Cooperative federalism
  • State capacity to respond to local agro-ecological risks.

Environmental & Public Health Implications

• India is among the largest pesticide consumers globally.
• Pesticide misuse linked to:
  • Farmer suicides
  • Water contamination
  • Biodiversity loss
• Weak regulation undermines:
  • SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)
  • SDG 3 (Health)
  • SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption).

---

Only 67 cities covered under clean air plan

---

Why in News?

• A CSE–CREA report (Jan 2026) highlights that only 67 cities are covered under the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP).
• This is despite India having 1,878 cities with population above 4 lakh.
• Raises concerns over:
  • Limited coverage of air-pollution control
  • Chronic PM pollution across urban India
  • Misalignment of funding priorities.

Relevance

GS Paper III – Environment

• Air pollution
• Environmental health
• Policy evaluation (NCAP)

GS Paper II – Governance

• Public policy design
• Centre–State coordination
• Evidence-based policymaking

Basics: What is NCAP?

• National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) launched in 2019.
• Nodal ministry: MoEFCC.
• Objective:
  • 20–30% reduction in PM10 and PM2.5 levels (baseline 2017; later extended to 2026).
• Approach:
  • City-specific action plans
  • Non-attainment city focus
  • Multi-sectoral coordination.

Key Findings of the Report

1. Limited Coverage

• Cities with population >4 lakh: 1,878
• Cities under NCAP: 67
• Coverage ratio: ~3.6%
• Implication:
  • Vast majority of polluted cities remain outside structured clean-air interventions.

2. India’s Most Polluted Cities (2025 PM2.5)

• Assam:
  • Byrnihat – 90 µg/m³
• Delhi NCR:
  • Delhi – 35 µg/m³
  • Ghaziabad – 35 µg/m³
• All far above:
  • WHO guideline: 5 µg/m³
  • Indian NAAQS: 40 µg/m³ (annual PM2.5).

3. Widespread Chronic Pollution

• 44% of Indian cities face chronic air pollution.
• Driven by:
  • Persistent emissions (transport, industry, construction)
  • Not just episodic events (stubble burning, dust storms).

4. PM10 Dominance in NCAP

• NCAP primarily targets PM10, not PM2.5.
• Issue:
  • PM2.5 is more harmful (penetrates lungs & bloodstreaaam).
  • Under-addressed despite being dominant pollutant in most cities.

Funding & Implementation Gaps

1. Misaligned Spending

• 68% of NCAP funds spent on:
  • Roads
  • Traffic management
• Limited spending on:
  • Industrial emission control
  • Clean energy transition
  • Airshed-based interventions.

2. Sectoral Blind Spots

• Weak focus on:
  • Industrial fuel switching
  • Power plant emissions
  • Construction dust beyond urban roads.

Structural Problems in NCAP Design

1. City-Centric, Not Airshed-Based

• Pollution spreads across regions.
• Current model ignores:
  • Inter-city transport of pollutants.
• Need for regional / airshed approach.

2. Exclusion of Industrial Towns

• Many polluted industrial clusters are:
  • Outside NCAP
  • Outside city-based governance frameworks.

3. Weak Regulatory Integration

• NCAP relies on:
  • Action plans
  • Advisory mechanisms
• Lacks:
  • Binding emission reduction mandates
  • Strong enforcement teeth.

Implications

Public Health

• Air pollution is among top risk factors for premature deaths in India.
• PM2.5 linked to:
  • Respiratory diseases
  • Cardiovascular disorders
  • Reduced life expectancy.

Environmental Governance

• NCAP’s limited reach questions:
  • Equity in environmental protection
  • Urban bias vs regional pollution realities.

SDG Linkages

• SDG 3: Good Health
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities
• SDG 13: Climate Action

Way Forward

• Expand NCAP coverage to more cities & industrial clusters.
• Shift from:
  • City-based → airshed-based planning.
• Rebalance funding towards:
  • Industrial emissions
  • Power plants
  • Clean fuel transitions.
• Strengthen:
  • PM2.5 monitoring
  • Emission inventories
  • Accountability frameworks.

---

Drugs problem is narco-terrorism, not mere crime

---

Why in News?

• Union Home Minister Amit Shah declared India’s drug problem as narco-terrorism, not just a law-and-order issue.
• Announcement coincides with:
  • Launch of a 3-year national anti-drug campaign (2025–2028).
  • Inauguration of National IED Data Management System (NIDMS) by NSG.
• Reflects a shift from policing approach to national security framework.

Relevance

GS Paper III – Internal Security

• Terror financing
• Organised crime
• Border security
• Use of technology in security

GS Paper II – Governance

• Federal coordination
• Role of MHA
• Institutional strengthening

What is Narco-Terrorism?

• Narco-terrorism:
  • Use of drug trafficking networks to finance terrorism, insurgency and organised violence.
• Drugs → money → weapons → terror infrastructure.
• Recognised globally by:
  • UNODC
  • US DEA (since 1980s, Latin America).

India’s Context: Why Drugs = National Security Threat

1. Terror Financing Link

• Drug profits fund:
  • Terror outfits
  • Cross-border insurgency
  • Urban terror modules.
• Particularly relevant for:
  • Punjab
  • Jammu & Kashmir
  • North-East.

2. Geographic Vulnerability (Facts)

• India lies between:
  • Golden Crescent (Afghanistan–Pakistan–Iran)
  • Golden Triangle (Myanmar–Laos–Thailand).
• Major trafficking routes:
  • Western border (Pakistan-linked heroin)
  • Eastern border (synthetic drugs, methamphetamine).

Data & Enforcement Outcomes (As cited)

• 2014–2024 (last decade):
  • ₹1 lakh crore worth drugs seized.
  • Sharp rise from pre-2014 levels.
• 2024 alone:
  • Major seizures of heroin, cocaine, synthetic drugs.
• Shows:
  • Scale of narco-economy
  • Growing sophistication of networks.

Government’s Strategic Shift

From Crime Control to Security Doctrine

• Earlier view:
  • Drugs as law-and-order / social problem.
• Current view:
  • Strategic conspiracy to destroy youth & economy.
• Narco-terrorism placed alongside:
  • Terrorism
  • Insurgency
  • Organised crime.

3-Year “Drug-Free India” Campaign (2025–28)

• Pillars:
  • Supply reduction: crackdown on traffickers.
  • Demand reduction: awareness, de-addiction.
  • Financial disruption: freezing narco-funds.
• Target:
  • Youth protection
  • Social health
  • Economic security.

Operational & Institutional Measures

1. Financial Intelligence Focus

• Emphasis on:
  • Tracking narco-money flows
  • Digital payment trail analysis
• Narco-terror networks depend on:
  • Hawala
  • Shell firms
  • Cross-border laundering.

2. Integrated Forensics & Technology

• Use of:
  • Forensic intelligence
  • AI & machine learning for pattern analysis.
• Aim:
  • Identify linkages between drugs, terror & explosives.

3. National IED Data Management System (NIDMS)

• Maintains data on:
  • All IED incidents since 1999.
• Enables:
  • Signature matching
  • Pattern recognition
  • Terror network mapping.
• Narco-terrorism link:
  • Drugs → terror → explosives.

4. Database Integration (Key Facts)

• Existing platforms:
  • CCTNS (crime & criminals)
  • ICJS (justice delivery)
  • NATGRID
• NIDMS complements them by:
  • Adding explosives-terror data layer.
• Example data scale:
  • ICJS: ~17.4 crore cases
  • Prison database: ~2.2 crore prisoners
  • Forensics database: ~31 lakh samples.

Role of States & Police

• Shah directed:
  • State DGPs to adopt mission-mode permanent teams.
  • Better coordination between:
    • Police
    • NCB
    • CAPFs
    • Intelligence agencies.
• Emphasis on:
  • End-to-end disruption (supply → finance → terror).

Why This Approach Matters?

Internal Security

• Narco-terrorism:
  • Fuels terrorism without visible weapons.
  • Weakens society internally.
• Treating it as crime alone is insufficient.

Youth & Social Impact

• Drugs:
  • Destroy demographic dividend.
  • Create social instability.
• Hence framed as:
  • Threat to future generations.

International Cooperation

• Narco-terrorism is transnational.
• Requires:
  • Intelligence sharing
  • Financial tracking
  • Border cooperation.