ABSTRACT
The article examines Operation Sindoor, the Indian military campaign against terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) that was initiated in May 2025. The operations legal constitutional and strategic aspects are examined along with how it fits with India’s sovereign right to self-defense and its constitutional duty to safeguard the lives and security of its people. The operations effects on foreign policy, the rule of law and India’s reputation as a responsible democracy operating within the bounds of international law are also discussed in the article.
INTRODUCTION
Despite repeated international condemnation, militant groups have long operated from Pakistani territory engaging in cross-border terrorism against India. In reaction to the horrific terrorist attack that killed 28 civilians including women and children in Pahalgam Kashmir on May 5 2025 India launched Operation Sindoor a precision military strike on terrorist bases on the other side of the border. This article examines the legal basis under both domestic and international law that authorises such an act of self-defense as well as the constitutional underpinnings of such an operation particularly the Indian States right and obligation to protect its citizens.
KEYWORDS
Operation Sindoor, counter-terrorism, sovereignty, national security, Article 21, international law, cross-border strikes.
MAIN BODY
India has adopted a more proactive rather than defensive strategy to combat cross-border terrorism. India has a strong anti-terrorist stance which has historically been set by responses like the Balakot Air Strikes in 2019 and the Surgical Strikes in 2016.Beginning in May 2025 Operation Sindoor represented a major development in this approach. Multiple precision airstrikes on terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (Punjab) were part of the well-coordinated operation. This development reflects a more thorough and aggressive approach to destroying terrorist bases that immediately threaten India’s security. The Indian Constitution specifically Articles 51 and 21 gives the State the authority to act against threats to its sovereignty and integrity in addition to encouraging peace and international cooperation. While acknowledging the States obligation to defend its borders and citizens Article 51 of the Directive Principles of State Policy promotes peace. The State is required to take the necessary measures to protect its citizens from both internal and external threats under Article 21 which guarantees the fundamental right to life and personal liberty. Given this Operation Sindoor may be viewed as a necessary constitutionally required response to guarantee both human life and national security. The basic structure doctrine established in seminal cases such as Kesavananda Bharati v. is also in line with this operation. Minerva Mills v. State of Kerala. Indian Union. These cases highlight how national security is an inalienable component of India’s constitution. The procedure also adheres to the guidelines established in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India with regard to striking a balance between individual freedom and government intervention guaranteeing that military operations are appropriate, proportionate and necessary. Operation Sindoor was a manifestation of India’s right to self-defense under international law as well as an assertion of its internal security. States inalienable right to self-defense against armed assaults is guaranteed by Article 51 of the UN Charter. Following the devastating terrorist attack in Pahalgam in May 2025 that claimed the lives of 28 civilians India obtained hard evidence that Pakistan-based terrorist organizations like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed were responsible for the attack. The following attacks targeted the infrastructure in charge of organizing and carrying out cross-border terrorist operations specifically targeting terrorist camps in the PoK. The application of the preemptive self-defense doctrine has gained international traction despite the fact that it is still a topic of legal debate. This is especially true when the host state is unwilling or unable to stop terrorist activities on its territory. Operation Sindoor was marked by meticulous targeting of terrorist-affiliated non-civilian sites minimizing the risk to innocent lives and guaranteeing adherence to international humanitarian norms. The international community acknowledged the validity of India’s response and implicitly supported its actions including those of countries like the United States and France. Operation Sindoor strengthened the Indian government’s determination to safeguard national security and defend its citizens on the home front. The majority of the public responded favorably, supporting the government’s firm decision. The operation made it abundantly evident that India would stop tolerating cross-border terrorism and would do everything in its power to protect its citizens. Through Operation Sindoor India was repositioned as a responsible global actor showcasing its dedication to upholding international law and constitutional principles while defending its citizens. The operations international support also demonstrated a change in the way the world views asymmetric warfare and countries rights to self-defense against cross-border non-state actors. India has redesigned its counterterrorism strategy with Operation Sindoor focusing on intelligence-driven military action and accuracy. The operation demonstrated India’s adherence to constitutional principles and international legal standards. It shows that India can exercise strategic restraint and military prowess while acting within the bounds of international law. The operation was overwhelmingly supported by the public and diplomatic community indicating that it was viewed as a necessary and justified response despite some critics voicing concerns about the possibility of escalation and the dangers of more conflict. Operation Sindoor has raised the bar for India’s counterterrorism strategy by highlighting the indisputable nature of the nations sovereignty and populace protection.
CONCLUSION
The intersection of legal reasoning, strategic defense and constitutional duty is best illustrated by Operation Sindoor. It operates within the parameters of international law, upholds the principle of sovereignty under the basic structure doctrine and reaffirms India’s commitment to protecting its citizens under Article 21. The operation when executed with restraint, legitimacy and resolve is a constitutional necessity rather than an act of aggression. In the future it establishes a standard for how a constitutional democracy can combat terrorism without sacrificing its moral and legal underpinnings.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY ADI MEHTA
