The case of Major Vikrant Jaitly, a retired Indian Army officer and brother of actor Celina Jaitly, has come under renewed public and legal attention as the Ministry of External Affairs confirmed that it is extending all possible assistance to him during his detention in the United Arab Emirates. Vikrant Jaitly has been held in the UAE for more than fourteen months, a period marked by limited communication, uncertainty about the legal process, and growing concern in India. The situation gained prominence this week after the Delhi high court directed the external affairs ministry to strengthen its support efforts and ensure that the detained officer receives proper legal aid, consular access, and sustained communication with his family.

According to the ministry, the Indian embassy in the UAE has been consistently engaged on the matter. External affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated during the weekly briefing that the government is closely monitoring the case and remains in regular contact with both UAE authorities and Jaitly’s family. Jaiswal confirmed that consular officials have visited Vikrant Jaitly four times since his detention, an important requirement in cases involving Indian nationals facing legal action abroad. Such access enables Indian authorities to assess the detainee’s physical and mental condition, ensure that legal rights are being upheld, and communicate any humanitarian concerns or procedural issues to local officials.

The Delhi high court’s involvement stems from a petition filed by actor Celina Jaitly, who alleged that her brother had been abducted and held illegally in Dubai in September 2024. She argued that more than a year after his detention, the Indian government had failed to obtain even basic information regarding his welfare, the charges against him, or the judicial process underway. Her plea sought the court’s intervention to compel the government to provide structured legal assistance, regular updates, and real-time communication with her brother. The petition also highlighted the emotional strain experienced by the family, particularly as crucial details about his health and legal status remained unclear.

The high court, after reviewing the submissions, instructed the external affairs ministry to ensure that Jaitly receives effective legal support and that his family is kept updated. It also emphasised the importance of consistent consular access, noting that the wellbeing of detained Indian nationals must be a priority regardless of the circumstances of their arrest. The court’s directive underscores the legal expectation that the Indian state must deploy all available diplomatic and consular channels to safeguard the rights of its citizens detained abroad.

During the hearing, counsel for the Union government informed the court that Vikrant Jaitly had been arrested in connection with a specific case in the UAE. Details of the case were not disclosed publicly due to the sensitivity of the matter, but the counsel stated that the Indian mission had been communicating with Vikrant’s wife and maintaining contact with relevant UAE officials. The government’s position was that regular consular access had already been granted and that Indian authorities were committed to assisting him. This aligns with the broader framework of international practice under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which establishes that detainees have the right to seek assistance from their home country’s diplomats.

Despite these assurances, Celina Jaitly’s petition highlighted significant gaps in communication and clarity, arguing that the family had not been given adequate information about the nature of the allegations or about her brother’s physical condition. Public interest in the matter grew after she expressed concerns that the prolonged silence from authorities could indicate procedural irregularities. She has maintained that the detention was illegal and that her brother may have been targeted or mishandled. While such claims are yet to be independently verified, they formed the basis for the high court’s order directing the external affairs ministry to enhance its engagement.

In its public statement, the ministry reiterated that it remains committed to assisting all Indian nationals who face legal difficulties abroad. Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stressed that the government acts whenever required, irrespective of an individual’s profile or profession, and that consular officials are instructed to ensure humane treatment and legal transparency in such cases. He noted that the directions issued by the Delhi high court on November 3 were being fully implemented and that the ministry would continue to offer all possible support to Major Vikrant and his family going forward.

Cases involving Indian nationals detained in foreign jurisdictions are often complicated by differences in legal systems, rules regarding disclosure, and cultural expectations about transparency. The UAE, in particular, has strict procedures governing the release of information regarding detainees, especially in cases involving national security, financial disputes, or immigration issues. In many instances, families in India find it difficult to receive timely updates, and communication delays contribute to uncertainty and anxiety. The role of the external affairs ministry becomes crucial in navigating these bureaucratic and legal layers, advocating for the rights of Indian nationals while respecting the sovereignty of the host country.

In this context, the ministry’s acknowledgment that the embassy is “seized of the matter” indicates that it considers the case active and sensitive. The reference to maintaining close contact with Vikrant’s wife suggests that officials have been working through family channels to gather information and provide updates. The spokesperson’s assurance that consular visits have been conducted on four occasions is also significant, as such visits allow diplomats to directly evaluate the detainee’s situation.

For Celina Jaitly and her family, however, these measures have not yet provided the clarity they are seeking. In her petition and public statements, she contended that there were prolonged periods during which they received no credible information about the legal proceedings, and that even basic details about his location and wellbeing were difficult to obtain. She argued that such opacity created a climate of fear and uncertainty, making it impossible for the family to know whether he was receiving fair treatment or whether his rights were being safeguarded. Her plea to the high court was therefore designed to compel a more structured and transparent approach from the Indian government.

The high court’s action in this case reflects a broader trend of judicial intervention to ensure accountability in matters involving foreign detentions. In the past, courts have reminded the government of its responsibility to uphold the constitutional rights of Indian citizens, even when they are outside the country. Such decisions reinforce the principle that the state cannot remain passive when its nationals face potential violations of due process abroad.

As of now, the external affairs ministry has stated clearly that it is providing “all possible assistance” to Major Vikrant. The immediate impact of the high court’s directive is expected to be an increase in frequency and transparency of communication, the provision of dedicated legal support, and sustained diplomatic engagement with UAE authorities. For the Jaitly family, this represents a critical step toward understanding the circumstances of his arrest and ensuring that he receives a fair legal process. The case will likely continue to be monitored by the court, the government, and the public in the coming weeks, particularly as new information emerges and diplomatic efforts continue.