INTRODUCTION
In light of the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, the Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s promptly directed authorities to airlift stranded tourists from his state has highlighted the need for inter-state coordination during crises. By making the decisive decision, the chief min demonstrated the functioning of emergency provisions in practice and also established important precedent for future crisis management in India’s federal system.
A terrorist strike on April 22, 2025, at Pahalgam took the lives of many individuals, two of them being tourists from Karnataka. In a rapid response, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah ordered emergency airlifting of over 40 Karnataka nationals stuck in the region. Such swift action raises serious food for thought over the legal frameworks of operations during emergencies crossing state borders and inter-state cooperation policies during times of crises.
BACKGROUND
The attack in Pahalgam claimed the lives of Manjunath Rao of Shivamogga and Bengaluru’s Mathikere area Bharat Bhushan, both of whom had come to Kashmir on vacation with their families. Both of them were gunned down in front of their families, leaving their wives and children traumatized and stranded in a foreign land. Madhusudhan Somishetty was another Karnataka man who was an Andhra Pradesh native living in Bengaluru.
India’s system of constitution, in dividing power between the Center and states, provides for action in response to emergencies. The governments of states have historically utilized power to protect their citizens even when they are outside territorial borders, though this is typically part of a larger national emergency or through coordination with the Center and states.
KEY POINTS
The Chief Minister’s airlift order is an important exercise of emergency powers by the executive. States do not normally exercise jurisdiction outside their territories, but the safety and welfare of citizens create an overriding duty of care irrespective of place. The Chief Minister’s directive ordered:
- Arranging a special flight for evacuation of approximately 40 stranded Karnataka tourists
- Deploying a team of officials to Kashmir to manage rescue operations
- Deputing Labour Minister Santosh Lad to oversee personally evacuation operations
- Providing various helpline numbers to gather information about stranded tourists
This is within the quasi-federal structure of India under which, during a state of emergency, both the central and provincial governments can assume higher powers. Both the Aircraft Act 1934 and the Defence of India Act 1962 provide legal grounds for assuming control of aircraft during emergencies, though typically these powers would be retained by the central government.
The Karnataka state government has taken a comprehensive approach to the crisis. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah himself called up the families of the deceased, speaking with Pallavi, wife of Manjunath Rao, and Sujatha, wife of Bharat Bhushan, sympathizing with them and assuring assistance. The bodies of the victims were to be brought back to Karnataka along with family members.
This crisis management is reminiscent of previous operations like Operation Sukoon (2006), Operation Safe Homecoming (2011), and the Kuwait Airlift (1990), albeit those were centrally executed efforts and not operations conducted by the states.
CONCLUSION
The CM’s air lift order in Karnataka creates a useful precedent for state governments to intervene in times of emergency to protect citizens regardless of geography. The Constitution reserves emergency provisions largely in the Centre, but the case presents the harsh reality that state governments have to move at lightning speed to protect their citizens regardless of place.
This case highlights the adaptive nature of federal cooperation during crises and places in context the necessity of flexible frameworks of emergency responses. As India is building its disaster management infrastructure, this case can be regarded as a model for how the states can aggressively lobby and protect their population during crises while operating within the overall constitutional framework of cooperative federalism.
“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.”
