As of today, January 13, 2026, the profiling of mosques, madrasas and their key personnel has formally started across the Kashmir Valley. Security agencies began distributing the four-page questionnaire this very week, roughly two months after the high-profile November 2025 arrest of the so-called “white collar” terror module.
That module shocked many because the accused were not stereotyped militants: they included doctors, engineers and other professionals who were allegedly channeling funds and spreading radical ideas, particularly to support The Resistance Front (an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba). Investigators say the network operated quietly through some religious institutions, which is why the government now wants a complete picture—location coordinates, land documents, monthly income and expenditure, bank details, sources of donations and zakat, sectarian orientation (Barelvi, Deobandi, Ahl-e-Hadith etc.), and detailed personal information on every imam, khatib, teacher, muezzin and managing committee member, including any past criminal or terror-related record.
The official line is straightforward: this database is needed to trace money flows, identify ideological shifts away from Kashmir’s historic Sufi tradition, and stop the pipeline that turns educated youth into supporters or recruits for militancy. The April 2025 Pahalgam attack, in which militants killed tourists, only strengthened the argument that soft support structures must be mapped and disrupted.
On the other side, the move has triggered sharp criticism. Prominent voices argue it amounts to collective suspicion aimed solely at one community. Questions are being raised about the legal basis: which specific law authorises such sweeping data collection on religious functionaries and institutions? Critics call it an invasion of privacy, an assault on religious freedom and dignity, and a step that could eventually allow authorities to dictate sermon content or interfere in day-to-day religious practice. Some have openly linked the initiative to broader political agendas from outside the Valley.
The security threat is undeniable—Kashmir has lost hundreds of lives to terrorism in recent years. Any government would feel compelled to act when professionals start quietly bankrolling violence. Yet history shows that measures perceived as blanket targeting of an entire faith community often breed the very alienation and resentment that militants feed on.
So the real question hanging over Srinagar and every village today is simple: will this exercise genuinely weaken terror networks by focusing on verifiable links and suspicious funding, or will the lack of visible safeguards and narrow targeting turn routine religious life into a permanent security file—pushing moderate voices further away and giving extremists fresh propaganda?
The coming weeks and months will tell whether this was smart, evidence-based counter-terrorism or an overreach that risks doing more harm than good.
