Reports, which we have not been able to verify with sources in India, say that special units of the Police in Punjab and the police in New Delhi have tracked and captured Pappalpreet Singh, a close associate of Amritpal Singh.

Amritpal Singh is named as a "radical Sikh preacher". The pair escaped arrest in Jalandhar and fled to Hoshiarpur where they separated. Amritpal Singh remains at large.

Amritpal Singh is a separatist agitator for Khalistan. Police began widespread action against the 'Waris Punjab De' group on 18 March.

This morning, The Times reported "India stalls trade talks with Britain over Sikh extremist group" saying that the information came from British trade officials. That has met with a rapid and strong denial, so broadly covered that The Times article has been all but swamped by coverage of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs statement that the report is "baseless."

But there are concerns that Britain is harbouring separatists: on 19th March, a "mob" protested outside the Indian High Commission in London against the action to arrest Amritpal Singh and his supporters the day before. Agitators within the High Commission pulled down the Indian flag, say reports.

The Times says "Indians don't want to talk about trade until they get a very public demonstration of condemnation of Khalistan extremism in the UK," a Whitehall source had told The Times."

"India finds unacceptable the indifference of the UK Government to the security of Indian diplomatic premises and personnel in the UK," the Indian Ministry said in a statement. India registered a strong protest with the UK government and the issue was also raised in the House of Commons where the actions of the separatists were quickly condemned.

Other reports say that India's Foreign Ministry had called in the British High Commissioner to demand answers about alleged absence of a police presence at the demonstration.

This might appear to be another land grab, and it might be, but the flag of independence is wrapped around a demand for a "pure" homeland for Sikh fundamentalists. Once more, religion is the banner around which separatism is promoted.

The argument is not new: India's independence from Britain in 1947 created a massive nation of disparate regions, some of which were religious and cultural heartlands. Some don't want to be part of a fully unified India.

Little is heard of the unrest in India, but it's omnipresent. Communists in the south, radical Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims all seek breakaway or at least significant autonomy. Some states, dominated by one group, make laws that oppress all minorities.

As was seen in London, that can easily spill over to the same groups despite living, even having become citizens of, other countries.

It's happened before: in Melbourne on 29th January, organisers of a so-called Punjab Independence Referendum came face to face with supporters of a united India. Supported by an organisation called Sikhs for Justice, which is a proscribed organisation in the USA,the idea was little more than to seek signatures on a petition in support of the Khalistani cause.

A brawl broke out and arrests were made. More followed on 21st March after Pappalpreet Singh's arrest. India says that there are frequent attacks on Hindu premises in Australia and has asked for protection.

"Signals that pro-Khalistan elements are stepping up their activities in Australia, actively aided and abetted by members of proscribed terrorist organisations such as the Sikhs for Justice and other inimical agencies from outside Australia, have been evident for some time," the Indian High Commission in Canberra has been quotes as saying on 26th January.

Radicalism in India has largely been behind the blinds, so far as international media is concerned. Little news, other than that relating to the constant battles on the Northern Border and the occasional insurgency into e.g. Delhi are reported outside India. Attacks by Indians on Indians rarely make national media around the world.

Given the massive number of Indians working overseas, it's important that there is increasing awareness of this potential powder keg. So far, there has been no serious violence, seemingly none that could be elevated to be classified as terrorism. But with growing unrest in countries where free-speech is an essential part of life, the signs are there that this might go beyond riots and into actions that are intended to cause serious harm for political purposes, the classic definition of terrorism.

And that means that questions of funding are going to become live issues.