21 Militants Killed in J&K as Indian Forces Target Pahalgam Attack Network

Officials say forensic evidence links slain men to Pakistan-based groups behind deadly massacre.

By Namith DP | Aug 11, 2025

A Turning Point in Jammu & Kashmir’s Security Landscape

On 22 April 2025, gunmen launched a calculated assault on Baisaran meadow near Pahalgam in Jammu & Kashmir, killing 26 civilians and injuring between 17 and 20 more. The victims included domestic tourists, local guides, and service providers. Eyewitness accounts documented by law enforcement described a swift, disciplined execution: the attackers emerged from forest cover, opened sustained fire with automatic rifles, and retreated through pre-identified escape routes. The attack was the deadliest against civilians in the Union Territory in recent years and prompted an immediate escalation in security measures across the region.

The Government of India characterized the incident as a cross-border terror operation. Intelligence and investigative agencies deployed to Pahalgam and adjoining districts within hours, aiming to secure evidence, identify suspects, and prevent further incidents. Over the following months, a series of high-profile encounters, arrests, and intelligence breakthroughs shaped a multi-layered counter-terror campaign.

1. The Pahalgam Attack: Established Facts and Confirmed Details

Security agencies have released a photo of four terrorists involved in Pahalgam terror attack. Business Standard.

Location and Timeline

The attack took place at approximately 11:15 a.m. on 22 April 2025 in Baisaran meadow, about 5 kilometres from Pahalgam town. This site is a popular tourist destination known for its open grasslands, pony rides, and trekking routes. On the day of the attack, an estimated 200 visitors were present. The first emergency calls reached police within minutes.

Casualties

Police records confirmed 26 fatalities and 17–20 injuries. Victims included men, women, and children from multiple Indian states. Medical teams from Pahalgam’s sub-district hospital and Anantnag’s district hospital were mobilised. Air evacuation support from the Indian Air Force was later documented in official reports.

Weapons and Tactics

Security sources reported the attackers carried a mix of AK-47 assault rifles and M4 carbines. Spent shell casings recovered at the site matched 7.62×39 mm and 5.56×45 mm NATO rounds. Ballistics experts concluded the firearms were military-grade. Witnesses noted the attackers wore weather-appropriate clothing resembling trekking gear, allowing them to blend in before opening fire.

2. Attribution and Investigative Findings

Suspected Groups

Initial suspicion fell on The Resistance Front (TRF), a group Indian authorities say operates as a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). TRF has claimed responsibility for past attacks in Jammu & Kashmir and often uses messaging channels to circulate statements. Security analysts note the group’s operational patterns include civilian-targeted shootings in high-visibility areas.

Forensic and Biometric Evidence

Investigators recovered identity documents bearing Pakistani registration details from the site of subsequent encounters with suspects. Biometric scans—fingerprints and Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) checks—matched profiles in India’s national terror database. Officials disclosed that these matches tied at least three individuals directly to the Pahalgam incident.

Local Collaboration

Arrests of two local residents in June 2025 revealed logistical support provided to the attackers, including safe houses, food supplies, and local transport. Interrogations led to sketches and identification of other potential facilitators, expanding the investigation’s scope.

3. Security Forces’ Post-Attack Operations

Strategic Coordination

Following the attack, the Indian Army, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF), and Jammu & Kashmir Police initiated joint cordon-and-search operations. These were concentrated in districts with known militant activity: Anantnag, Kishtwar, Shopian, and Pulwama. Tactical units operated with aerial reconnaissance from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and manned helicopters.

Intelligence-Led Targeting

Operations relied on intelligence fusion from three sources:

Human Intelligence (HUMINT): Inputs from informants, surrendered militants, and community sources.
Signals Intelligence (SIGINT): Monitoring of communication patterns and intercepted messages.
Forensic Intelligence (FORINT): Ballistic, biometric, and material evidence from crime scenes.

4. Key Operations and Encounters

Operation Mahadev (July 2025)

Objective: Neutralize militants linked to the Pahalgam attack.
Outcome: Three militants killed. Biometric confirmation and recovered Pakistani IDs identified them as LeT operatives. Weapon seizures included two AK-47 rifles, one M4 carbine, and large quantities of ammunition.
Intelligence Impact: Evidence from the site allowed mapping of escape routes and transit points used after the April attack.

Kishtwar Encounter

Objective: Intercept suspected militants transiting between forested zones.
Outcome: Prolonged exchange of fire in rugged highland terrain. Forces recovered arms and documented food supplies consistent with prolonged militant operations.
Tactical Significance: Reinforced the need for sustained surveillance in high-altitude regions.

Aggregate Post-Attack Results

By August 2025, official tallies showed 21 militants killed across six separate engagements linked directly or indirectly to the Pahalgam case. Authorities also reported multiple arrests of alleged facilitators.

5. Diplomatic and Political Consequences

India–Pakistan Relations

Within days of the attack, India summoned Pakistan’s diplomatic representatives, lodged formal protests, and announced the downgrading of bilateral engagement. Military attachés were expelled. Indian officials publicly named Pakistan-based groups as responsible and presented initial evidence at domestic and international forums.

Regional Security Climate

Policy research institutions documented a spike in cross-border firing incidents during May and June 2025. The Stimson Center and other think tanks described this period as the most intense India–Pakistan standoff in several years, involving troop movements, heightened aerial patrols, and limited cross-border artillery exchanges.

6. Publicly Released Evidence

Authorities released the following categories of evidence to support attribution claims:

Biometric Matches: Fingerprints matched with profiles of known LeT operatives.
Identity Documents: Recovered Pakistani passports and national identity cards from encounter sites.
Forensic Ballistics: Weapon signatures matched to known cross-border arms supply routes.
Digital Media: Seized mobile phones containing geolocation data and communications with handlers.

While the government emphasized the credibility of this evidence, independent verification by international forensic bodies remains pending.

7. Limitations of Verification

Journalists and international observers have noted constraints:

Restricted access to conflict zones prevents independent examination of sites.
Claims of responsibility or denial by militant groups often serve strategic narratives.
Independent labs have not yet examined the recovered evidence, limiting third-party authentication.

8. Lessons for Counter-Terror Operations

Institutionalizing Real-Time Forensics

Operation Mahadev demonstrated the operational advantage of immediate biometric and forensic analysis. Deploying mobile forensic units with field capability can shorten the timeline between attack and suspect identification.

Securing Civilian Zones

The Pahalgam attack targeted a tourist area with limited security presence. Authorities should:

Establish permanent security checkpoints at entry points to high-traffic sites.
Deploy visible patrols during peak tourist seasons.
Use UAVs for wide-area surveillance.

Disrupting Local Facilitation Networks

Arrests of facilitators underscore the importance of local intelligence. Community engagement, socio-economic development, and targeted deradicalization programs can reduce the risk of local support for militant operations.

9. Examples of Tactical Execution

Operation	Objective	Outcome
Operation Mahadev	Eliminate Pahalgam-linked militants	3 militants killed, evidence recovered, escape routes identified
Kishtwar Encounter	Intercept militants in high-altitude terrain	Engagement in remote area, arms recovered, operational routes disrupted
Shopian Sweep	Clear suspected hideouts	Arrests of two facilitators, recovery of communication devices linked to April attackers

10. Indicators to Monitor Going Forward

Parliamentary Briefings: Future sessions may reveal detailed charge sheets and comprehensive forensic reports.
International Forensic Reviews: Independent verification could confirm or challenge cross-border attribution claims.
Operational Tempo: The number and scale of future encounters will indicate whether the operational network has been dismantled or adapted.

11. Conclusion

The Pahalgam attack on 22 April 2025 marked a severe escalation in Jammu & Kashmir’s security environment. The Indian security response—anchored in rapid intelligence gathering, targeted operations like Operation Mahadev, and arrests of facilitators—has yielded measurable tactical gains. Forensic and biometric evidence, as publicly disclosed, strengthens the government’s attribution to Pakistan-based networks, though independent verification remains a pending factor in the evidentiary chain.

Future effectiveness will depend on sustaining intelligence-led targeting, securing civilian-populated zones, and integrating community resilience into counter-terror frameworks. The events since April 2025 demonstrate both the vulnerabilities in high-profile civilian spaces and the operational capacity of Indian security forces to adapt and respond.