Pahalgam Attack 2025 - Intelligence Gaps Assessment

The Case of Sheikh Sajjad Gul

Sheikh Sajjad Gul, identified as the mastermind behind the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 people(Photo | NIA)

This assessment examines critical lapses in intelligence and counter-terror oversight that enabled Sheikh Sajjad Gul—now identified as the mastermind of the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives. The intelligence failures allowed him to operate undetected across multiple Indian states, reestablish terrorist infrastructure, and lead a Pakistan-backed proxy group from abroad.

Gul’s long-standing involvement in terror activities dates back to his 2002 arrest in Delhi with 5 kg of RDX. Despite a conviction and 10-year prison sentence, his post-release trajectory reveals severe blind spots in monitoring, tracking, and inter-agency coordination. After reportedly relocating to Pakistan in 2017 and assuming leadership of The Resistance Front (TRF)—a Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) front—he orchestrated several high-profile attacks in Jammu and Kashmir.

Of particular concern is the revelation that Gul stayed in Kerala to pursue a lab technician course, a fact that remained unknown to state intelligence units until recently. Furthermore, he successfully established a diagnostic lab in Kashmir that allegedly served as a logistical hub for militant operatives. These developments expose significant systemic failures in threat profiling, cross-state data sharing, and post-conviction surveillance.

This report provides a brief framework to analyze where, how, and why intelligence mechanisms failed. The objective is to inform policymakers, security agencies, and intelligence professionals seeking to identify and plug operational gaps before they are exploited again.

NOTE: This is a living document. We will continue updating this assessment as new information emerges and as we draw comparisons with relevant past cases. For the latest version, we encourage readers to revisit this page regularly.

If you value the work we do at GreatGameIndia and want to support our continued investigations and intelligence reporting, we urge you to subscribe to GGI for just $10/month. Your support makes independent analysis like this possible.

Why was there no surveillance or tracking mechanism in place to monitor Sajjad Gul after his release from prison in 2017, despite his prior conviction for terrorism involving 5 kg of RDX?

QUESTION 1

Gul was convicted in 2003 for plotting serial blasts in Delhi and served a 10-year sentence. Post-release, he relocated to Pakistan and rejoined terrorism under ISI patronage, eventually leading the TRF.

What mechanisms are in place to monitor the post-prison activities of convicted terrorists in India?

Why did these fail to detect Gul’s establishment of a diagnostic lab later used for terrorist logistics?

QUESTION 2

After prison, Gul set up a diagnostic lab in Kashmir, which was used to support terror operatives. This suggests a complete lapse in monitoring his reintegration and movements post-release.

Why was the Kerala Police unaware of Gul’s presence in the state until recently?

What explains the lack of communication between central agencies and state intelligence units regarding known terror suspects’ movements within India?

QUESTION 3

Despite Gul’s background, Kerala Police only became aware of his time in the state after national media revelations. His stay occurred without any traceable intelligence input or local alert.

To what extent did the lack of centralized intelligence databases and inter-state intelligence coordination contribute to Gul’s ability to move across states and re-establish himself as a terror leader undetected?

QUESTION 4

Gul moved freely across Indian states for education and work after serving time for terrorism, without raising alerts, pointing to systemic coordination breakdowns.

Did Gul use fake or forged identity documents during his educational stints?

If so, why weren’t such discrepancies flagged during routine verification or background checks by educational institutions or local authorities?

QUESTION 5

He completed an MBA in Bangalore and later took a lab technician course in Kerala. No red flags appear to have been raised during admission, indicating possible document forgery or weak ID vetting.

How did state intelligence units and educational institutions miss the opportunity to flag a person with a previous terror conviction enrolling in professional courses in high-profile institutions across multiple states?

QUESTION 6

There was no interlinking of terror offender databases with admissions or background verification processes at academic institutions.

Why was there no digital or physical footprint detected by immigration or intelligence agencies when Gul moved to Pakistan after his release, especially given the ISI's known interest in recruiting released militants?

QUESTION 7

Gul relocated to Pakistan after his release, where he was trained by ISI. There is no record of his travel or monitoring of this movement by border or intelligence agencies.

How did intelligence agencies miss Gul's transition from a convicted overground worker to a high-level terror operative and eventual mastermind of multiple attacks, including the Pahalgam massacre?

QUESTION 8

From being an RDX carrier in 2002 to leading the TRF and planning major attacks (2020–2024), Gul’s trajectory went unnoticed until the Pahalgam incident.

Given Gul's known links to terror organizations and ISI, why was there no inter-agency monitoring of his network, finances, or movements post-2017, especially during his time setting up a lab in Kashmir?

QUESTION 9

The diagnostic lab in Kashmir served as a logistical hub for terrorists. There was no evident financial or operational scrutiny of Gul’s activities.

Was there any monitoring of known terror-linked families—particularly Gul's—considering his brother’s involvement in past militancy and alleged role in terror financing from the Gulf?

QUESTION 10

Gul’s brother, a former doctor and militant, fled to Saudi Arabia and now allegedly funds terror networks. This suggests a missed opportunity for familial surveillance.

If Gul stayed in Kerala for a course, why did the state police or local intelligence fail to document his presence despite institutional and residential footprints?

QUESTION 11

Kerala Police stated they had no record of Gul’s stay, indicating failure to track either institutional enrollment or local accommodation databases.

Was there a deliberate strategy by Gul to maintain a low profile in Kerala?

What intelligence tools are in place to detect such stealthy movements by high-risk individuals?

QUESTION 12

Gul’s Kerala stint remains unverified, with uncertainty over whether it was clandestine. No surveillance infrastructure appears to have flagged this.

Leave a Reply

Daily Counter-Intelligence Briefing Newsletter

We will send you just one email per day.

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.