Nearly two years ago, around 170 people were killed in the 2008 Mumbai attacks which lasted two days, and was reported primarily by citizens on the ground through citizen journalism; posting updates to Twitter and Facebook through their mobile devices.
Update (1st August 2010, 12:55 GMT): The BBC confirmed via the UAE's state media that come October, all half a million BlackBerry users in the region will have some services suspended unless a "solution compatible with local laws is reached", amid national security concerns.
As a criminology student focusing and specialising in areas of terrorism, specifically the use of technology within terror organisations and the use of social media, I can see this in two minds in regards to this:
RIM wants to ensure user privacy, but of course wouldn't want a terror attack to take place at any given place or time.
India also wants to prevent such terror attacks, but it's losing the battle by not being able to read highly encrypted data.
It's a tricky one, I will admit.
India faces a multitude of terror threats, just as many fast-developing economies and countries around the world. The increased use in technology to better communications in order to orchestrate acts of terror are clearly being used as the rest of ordinary society does.
The NSA for the US and GCHQ for the UK are two common examples of these. But better resources and technologies allow encryption to be broken - regardless of RIM's intervention or preventative measures.
The US and the UK have had very few terrorist attacks since September 11th, as a benchmark, though not proving a connection between intercepted data and preventing attacks, but makes the case more likely.
With consumer privacy being a constant hot topic, especially in the rise of publicly available data and the need to share your own information to gain others - social networking being a prime example, the individual right to privacy of communications takes personal precedence.
So interestingly, it boils down to diplomatic tit-for-tat. I am fully aware that my own government of which I helped in democratically electing monitors my communications in a secure, fair and justified way. Though my government expects a terrorist attack, we haven't had a successful one since the 2007 Glasgow Airport bombing of which no civilians died.
But those in an area of uncertainty around terrorism and national security, the need to accept certain 'breaches' in civil liberties are almost necessary to prevent societal damage. Of course, there is a line to be crossed, and only local culture can determine that as so.