Terrorism coverage under the standalone Terrorism and Sabotage Insurance Policy is defined as:

“An Act of Terrorism means an act or series of acts, including the use of force or violence, of any person or group(s) of persons, whether acting alone or on behalf of or in connection with any organization (s), committed for political, religious or ideological purposes including the intention to influence any government and/or to put the public in fear for such purposes”.

Farmers are protesting for the Minimum Support Price for various crops. They plan to march to Delhi. The government is trying to ensure the farmers do not reach Delhi. Let’s assume that the protestors are not allowed to proceed towards Delhi and the leaders of these farmers give inflammatory speeches against the central government. In anger, the farmers resort to violence and damage lots of property.

The question is whether these above hypothetical acts fall under the definition of Terrorism as defined in the Terrorism and Sabotage stand-alone policy.

• Is there use of force or violence? – Yes
• Are they committed for political and ideological purposes? – Yes
• Are they committed to influencing the Government? – Yes
• So do they fall under the definition of Terrorism?
• The answer should be Yes.

Will these hypothetical losses be paid under the stand-alone Terrorism policy? Or will the losses be paid under the Riots in Fire/IAR policy?

Will the situation be any different if the coverage was under the Indian Terrorism Pool?