India's 70+ burning questions for Tahawwur Rana: Will he finally spill 26/11 secrets?

With Tahawwur Hussain Rana now in the custody of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) for 18 days, India stands at a critical juncture in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks probe. The extradition of Rana — a Canadian national of Pakistani origin and a known accomplice of David Coleman Headley — marks a major breakthrough in India’s efforts to bring all perpetrators of the 2008 carnage to justice. But more importantly, it opens the door to long-awaited answers.

The NIA, which successfully secured his extradition after years of legal and diplomatic push, now has a short but crucial window to extract actionable intelligence that could unravel the full extent of the 26/11 conspiracy and expose the involvement of Pakistan-based state and non-state actors.

Here’s a comprehensive list of questions that the Indian agencies are expected to grill Rana on:

1. Where was Rana physically located on November 26, 2008, when the attacks began?

2. Why did he travel to India between November 8 and 21, 2008?

3. Which cities did he visit and whom did he meet during this period?

4. When did he first learn about the impending Mumbai attacks?

5. What role did he play in identifying or selecting targets like CST, Taj, Oberoi, or Nariman House?

6. What was discussed during his meeting with a Powai-based witness about crowded areas in South Mumbai?

7. What specific responsibilities was he assigned in the lead-up to 26/11?

8. Was he merely a facilitator, or did he actively plan operations with others?

9. What was his role in helping extend Headley’s Indian visa for 10 years?

10. Was he involved in logistics, financing, or procurement of resources for the attackers?

11. Did he help in acquiring GPS systems, phones, or fake IDs used by the 10 terrorists?

12. Was he aware of the sea route used to infiltrate Mumbai?

13. How did Rana and Headley first meet, and who introduced them?

14. Why did Rana agree to procure a fake visa and provide cover for Headley?

15. What information did Headley relay back to Rana from his India reconnaissance trips?

16. What was the nature of their conversations — casual or operational?

17. Did these discussions involve detailed planning or target assessment?

18. How did they coordinate movements and exchange instructions?

19. Who else in Rana’s Chicago-based immigration firm helped cover for Headley?

20. Were other operatives also facilitated entry via Rana’s immigration business?

21. What was discussed in the 230+ phone calls between Rana and Headley?

22. Were any coded instructions used in these calls?

23. What do email exchanges reveal about the extent of the conspiracy?

24. What was discussed in messages referencing Ilyas Kashmiri and Abdur Rehman?

25. What was the content of Rana's conversations with Major Iqbal?

26. What data was retrieved from Rana’s devices in the US — including surveillance footage, maps, or encrypted files?

27. How did Rana’s immigration firm serve as a front for terror operations?

28. Did the firm create fake paperwork or identities to facilitate terrorist travel?

29. Was the business used to funnel money for sleeper cells or reconnaissance missions?

30. Were any international operatives helped by the firm to enter India or other countries?

Also read: Tahawwur Rana extradited: Will he rip the mask off Pakistan's 26/11 lies?

31. How and when did Rana meet LeT chief Hafiz Saeed?

32. What was the nature of their relationship — strategic, ideological, or financial?

33. Did Rana provide logistical or monetary support to LeT?

34. What did LeT provide in return — protection, training, coordination?

35. Can Rana identify key LeT members by name, photo, or role?

36. What is his understanding of LeT's hierarchy and recruitment strategy?

37. Who funds LeT — are any state actors or foreign governments involved?

38. Who supplies weapons, explosives, and equipment to the group?

39. What does Rana know about LeT-HuJI training camps — location, content, personnel?

40. How are recruits trained, radicalised, and psychologically prepared for suicide missions?

41. Who makes the final call to execute attacks — LeT command or ISI handlers?

42. How many individuals are typically involved in operational planning, and what are their roles?

43. Did Headley introduce Rana to ISI officers, or vice versa?

44. What were ISI’s primary objectives — was Mumbai the only target?

45. Were other Indian cities like Delhi, Hyderabad, or Bangalore also considered?

46. Which ISI officials gave approvals or instructions — aside from Major Iqbal and Sameer Ali?

47. Was the ISI operating with approval from the Pakistani government?

48. What funding mechanisms were used — hawala, shell companies, cash couriers?

49. Who issued real-time instructions during the 60-hour siege?

50. Did ISI offer safe houses or extraction plans for operatives post-attack?

51. What is the chain of communication between LeT and ISI?

52. Were other terror operations planned but aborted?

53. Did Rana have knowledge of future targets, either in India or globally?

54. Was his firm involved in coordinating attacks outside India?

55. Was Rana aware of or connected to international terror plots?

56. Did he provide logistical support to operatives outside of the 26/11 module?

57. Did he help terrorists with travel, documents, or hiding identities?

58. Did any Indian national knowingly or unknowingly assist Headley or Rana?

59. Were any Indian individuals or entities in contact with the duo pre-attack?

60. Was Rana introduced to any Indian citizens who provided logistical or financial support?

61. Did Headley mention receiving help from locals during target surveillance?

62. Were hotel staff, NGOs, private firms, or officials compromised or approached?

63. Can Rana identify phone numbers, emails, or physical contacts based in India involved in the operation?

64. Was Rana involved in radicalisation efforts, online or offline?

65. Did his firm or network promote extremist narratives in diaspora communities?

66. Did he help recruit individuals for terror training or operations?

67. Who financed Headley’s India trips?

68. Was Rana involved in money laundering or illicit fund transfers?

69. Were any Indian bank accounts, remittance services, or hawala networks used?

70. Is Rana aware of any active sleeper cells in India or abroad?

71. Has he been in touch with terror operatives post-2008?

72. Can he reveal any ongoing plots, aliases, or operational names relevant to Indian intelligence?

Rana’s interrogation could offer India unprecedented clarity on the institutional backing that the 10 Pakistani terrorists had when they landed on Mumbai shores in 2008. His statements could also implicate terror masterminds still walking free in Pakistan — such as Hafiz Saeed, the founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Zakiur Rehman Lakhvi, the operation commander of the Mumbai attacks. Both men, despite overwhelming evidence, continue to enjoy political and social clout in Pakistan, often under the state's protection.

Ajmal Kasab, the lone terrorist caught alive, had clearly confessed to being trained and sent by the LeT with support from the Pakistani military establishment. With Rana now in India’s custody, officials hope his testimony can provide incontrovertible links between the terrorists, their funders, and Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus.

Also read: Tahawwur Rana’s Extradition: A 26/11 Conspirator Finally Faces Indian Justice

The court has directed the NIA to ensure Rana’s medical needs are comprehensively addressed during his custody. The 64-year-old is reportedly suffering from multiple serious health issues, including Parkinson’s disease and heart ailments, which were part of his last-ditch attempt to evade extradition in the US.

Despite these concerns, India is focused on the larger objective: unmasking the truth behind the 26/11 attacks, bringing justice to the victims, and exposing those who orchestrated the massacre from across the border.

As the interrogation progresses, the world will be watching closely — especially to see how far and how high the trail of culpability leads within Pakistan’s state machinery.