Modi-Exposed-2014-Report-Copyright-awaaz

Narendra Modi Exposed 

Challenging the Myths Surrounding 

the BJP’s Prime Ministerial Candidate 

edited by 

Gautam Appa and anish vanaik 

Published by Awaaz Network 

© 2014

Published by 

Awaaz Network and The Monitoring Group 

London Civil Rights and Art Centre 

Upper Floors, 37 Museum Street 

London WC1A 1LQ 

office@awaaz-uk.org 

www.awaaz-uk.org 

The Monitoring Group 

© Awaaz Network 

All rights reserved 

Design © Jagdish Patel 

Distributed under license by the Awaaz Network 

First Edition, February 2014 

Printed by the The Monitoring Group 

First Edition 

ISBN 978-0-9576974-2-3

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF 

SAEED DAWOOD, SAKIL DAWOOD, MOHAMMED ASWAT, 

YUSUF PAREGAR AND ALL THOSE 

THOUSANDS KILLED DURING THE 

GUJARAT GENOCIDE OF 2002 

Narenda Modi exposed 

3

4 awaaz network

Contents 

Glossary of terms and abbreviations 5 

introduction 7 

1 Narendra Modi: The Making of a Hindutva Leader 10 

2 Narendra Modi’s culpability in the Gujarat Genocide 16 

3 The Murder of British Citizens in a Genocide Forgotten 18 

4 A Clean Chit? Has Narendra Modi been Absolved 

by the Supreme Court? 26 

5 Violence and Control: Modi, Hindutva and Women 32 

6 Don’t Believe the Hype: Modi’s Model of Governance 38 

7 Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar 48 

8 Hindutva Fascism in the UK 56 


5


Glossary of terms and abbreviations 

Bajrang Dal: (lit. Hanuman’s Army) The youth wing of the VHP, it has been involved in the most violent actions 

of the Sangh Parivar since the 1980s. 

BJP: Bharatiya Janata Party (lit. Indian People’s Party) The major opposition party in India today and the wing 

of the Sangh Parivar (see below) involved in electoral politics (for more details see ‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh 

Parivar’) 

Genocide: (according to definition adopted by UN General Assembly on December 9 1948) ‘when any of the 

following acts are committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious 

groups such as: 

a. Killing members of the group 

b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group 

c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in 

whole or in part 

d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group 

e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group’ 

Hindutva: An ideology that defines Indian nationalism in terms of Hindu values. It suggests that only those 

people can be full citizens of India whose ‘fatherland’ and ‘holy land’ are situated in India. (For more details see 

‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar’) 

HSS: Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (lit. Hindu Volunteers Corps) The UK offshoot of the RSS that presides 

over a ‘family’ of organisations in UK that espouse Hindutva. (for further details see ‘Hindutva Fascism in the 

UK’) 

RSS: Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (lit. National Volunteers Corps) Established in 1925-26, an exclusively 

male organization dedicated to propagating the political ideology of Hindutva. It presides over the Sangh Parivar 

(for further details see ‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar’) 

Sangh Parivar: (lit. Family of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) The group of organisations presided over by 

the RSS dedicated to propagating Hindutva. Different bodies operate in different spheres and on specific issues. 

(for further details see ‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar’) 

VHP: Vishwa Hindu Parishad (lit. World Hindu Council) The member of the Sangh Parivar dedicated to the 

propagation of Hinduism internationally and in India. (for further details see ‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar’). 


7


Introduction 

Narendra Modi is the Prime Ministerial candidate for India’s main opposition party in the General 

Elections to be held before May this year. As Chief Minister of the state of Gujarat in 2002, Modi presided 

over a massacre of Muslims that conforms to the UN definition of genocide. At the time this had evoked 

widespread domestic and international condemnation. Recently, however, there has been a determined 

campaign to paint him in a different light. One prong of the campaign has been to argue that the events 

of 2002 should be consigned to the past as the Supreme Court of India has given Modi a ‘clean chit’. The 

second prong has been to present Modi as a uniquely competent administrator who has worked miracles in 

Gujarat. This collection of briefings presents facts that challenge both these claims and argues that Modi 

remains a figure deserving international opprobrium and should remain a persona non grata for us here in 

Britain. 

The articles that follow cover a number of different questions: 

Narendra Modi: The Making of a Hindutva Leader 

Associated with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) since the age of eight, Modi has consistently 

espoused their Hindu-supremacist ideology. Chetan Bhatt (Director, Centre for the Study of Human Rights 

at LSE) shows that Modi has been involved in the communally-divisive mass mobilisations of the RSS 

since the 1980s. This includes the lead up to the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque in 1992 and its violent 

aftermath. 

Narendra Modi’s Culpability in the Gujarat Genocide: A Factsheet 

Gautam Appa (Professor Emeritus, London School of Economics) and Suresh Grover (Director of The 

Monitoring Group) provide a succinct summary of the events of 2002 where over 2000 people, mostly 

Muslim, were killed. They also outline Modi’s nefarious role in instigating and promoting the carnage. 

The Murder of British Citizens in a Genocide Forgotten 

Grover writes about the horrific experience of four British Muslims during their visit to Gujarat in 

February-March 2002. Three out of their party of four were murdered. Their families continue to struggle 

for justice in India and the UK. 

A Clean Chit? Has Narendra Modi been Absolved by the Supreme Court? 

Appa points out that the Supreme Court (SC) has never pronounced on Modi’s guilt. A Special Investigation 

Team appointed by the SC had suggested that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute Modi. 

This has been contradicted by the advocate appointed by the SC to review the team’s evidence. In fact, the 

judicial process continues. 


9

Violence and Control: Modi, the Sangh Parivar and Women 

Pragna Patel, Director of the Southall Black Sisters, discusses the crucial issue of the patriarchal 

cast of Hindutva ideology. Most chillingly, in 2002 it was manifested as systematic rape and assault 

of Muslim women in Gujarat. Modi’s deep-seated belief in the exercise of control over women continues 

to be in evidence in Gujarat since 2002. 

Don’t Believe the Hype: Modi’s Model of Governance 

Appa shows that the image of Modi as a model administrator in Gujarat is largely PR spin. On 

most counts of human development Modi’s performance is risible. Even in terms of growth, Modi’s 

role is much more modest than has been propagated. Corruption and cronyism remain rife. Mob 

violence against Muslims is the only area where his administrative record remains unsurpassed. 

Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar 

Bhatt surveys the ideals and organisation of the RSS in India. Inspired by the German and Italian 

fascist parties, it promotes an exclusionary ‘Hindutva’ ideology envisioning a Hindu India in which 

non-Hindus are second class citizens. In organisational terms, the Sangh Parivar (family of the RSS) 

consists of BJP in parliamentary politics, VHP in Hindu religious fold, Bajrang Dal as a youth wing, 

ABVP as a student wing, Rashtra Sevika Samiti as the women’s wing and many more among workers, 

tribal people and a plethora of cultural, social and voluntary work organisations controlled by 

the RSS to foster Hindutva. 

Hindutva Fascism in the UK 

Finally, Bhatt documents the organisational fronts and networks the RSS has established in UK 

to further its Hindu-supremacist aims. Many of these, such as the National Hindu Students’ Forum, 

deny any connection with the RSS but work to fund and support RSS activities and aims. They have 

had a disproportionate influence in Parliament and work to provide material support to the RSS in 

India. 

One consequence of Modi’s role in the 2002 riots was his pariah status abroad. In the aftermath 

the US State department revoked his business and tourist visas because of his involvement in “serious 

violations of religious freedom”. Based on its own investigations, the UK government adopted 

a de facto policy of non-engagement with Modi. Consequently he was unable to take up invitations 

to speak at various events in the UK in 2005 and 2009. His opponents in India keep pointing to this 

blemish in his record. Consequently, the international community is a key target for Modi’s rebranding 

as a model administrator. 

In a move that many saw as putting economic expediency before moral responsibility, the Foreign 

and Commonwealth Office (FCO) sent the British High Commissioner to visit him in October 

2012. ‘I am no longer a pariah; the British have come to their senses at last and are willing to 


welcome me’, crowed Modi. Even here, however, the FCO was compelled to claim that the decision to 

re-engage Modi was in part to secure justice for the families of the three Muslim British nationals who 

were killed in the Gujarat riots and that engagement is not the same as endorsement. So the stigma of 

pariah status was not entirely removed. 

This is when the Labour and Tory Friends of India stepped in with an invitation to Modi to address 

MPs in the House of Parliament. When pressed, they peddled a fictitious ‘clean chit’ to Modi by the 

Supreme Court of India. The whitewash of Modi’s image was complete. 

Modi is now perceived as a legitimate contender to be Prime Minister of India. Even the US government, 

in February 2014, has changed its tune and sought an official meeting with Modi. No explanation 

has been given about why his ‘serious violation of religious freedom’ is forgiven. Meanwhile, the 

victims of the violence he unleashed cry out for justice. It is important to redress this cynical attempt at 

undermining the fight for justice by the thousands of victims of Gujarat riots including the families of 

British Muslims killed there. Modi should remain a pariah in Britain. 


11

One 

Narendra Modi: The Making of a Hindutva Leader 

Prof. Chetan Bhatt, Director, Centre for the Study of Human Rights, 

London School of Economics 

Summary 

• Narendra Modi has had a lifelong association with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh 

(RSS). His career has been built on organisational and ideological commitment to the 

Hindu nationalist ideals of the Sangh Parivar. 

• Modi has been involved in the communally-divisive and violent mass mobilisations of 

the Sangh Parivar since the 1970s. This includes the mobilisations that led up to the 

destruction of the Ayodhya mosque in 1992 and its bloody aftermath. 

• Through this period Modi has worked with a wide variety of Sangh-affiliates ranging 

from the VHP and its violent youth wing (Bajrang Dal), to the RSS student wing and 

the BJP. 

• Modi’s rise through the ranks of the Sangh Parivar, including his stint as Gujarat Chief 

Minister, has been through the beneficence of the RSS. His ferocious ambition as CM 

in Gujarat temporarily alienated the militaristic RSS. His nomination as prime ministe 

rial candidate for the BJP was, however, once again secured through the blessing of the 

RSS. 

• An extensive and well-coordinated PR campaign, across different kinds of media, 

has tried to sweep Modi’s human rights record under the carpet while painting him as a 

uniquely competent and business-friendly leader. 

• Modi continues to deny responsibility of any kind for the 2002 genocide in Gujarat or 

its longer-term fallout. He also refuses to apologise for his statements and role during 

those events. 


Narendra Modi is the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Hindu nationalist 

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for the forthcoming Indian General Election, 

to be held before the end of May 2014. Modi has been the Chief 

Minister of the state of Gujarat since October 2001. Following the 

carnage in Gujarat in 2002 and further polarization of communities, he 

employed extreme anti-minority political rhetoric to win three consecutive 

state assembly elections in 2002, 2007 and 2012. 

Narendra Modi is deeply committed to the far-right extremist, violent 

and anti-democratic ideology of Hindutva. Hindutva postulates that 

India should become an exclusively Hindu Nation-State (see ‘Hindutva, 

RSS and the Sangh Parivar’). The Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS), 

whose core ideology is Hindutva, was formed in the mid-1920s under the 

direct inspiration of National Socialism and Fascism. Since its inception, 

the RSS has been involved in numerous mass anti-minority campaigns, 

and has been repeatedly implicated in acts of serious communal violence 

in independent India. The assassination of Gandhi was undertaken by 

Nathuram Godse, a member of the RSS. The RSS provides the ideology 

and personnel for a number of organisations active at different levels 

of civil and political society in India: among others these include the 

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the 

Bajrang Dal. These are termed the Sangh Parivar (family of the RSS). 

Modi at a political rally, September 2013 

by NarendraModiofficial 

‘I am nationalist. 

I’m patriotic. 

Nothing is wrong. 

I am born Hindu. 

Nothing is wrong. 

So I’m a Hindu nationalist. 

So yes, you can say I’m a 

Hindu nationalist because 

I’m a born Hindu.’ 

Narendra Modi, 

July 2013 

Modi’s political journey, his political style, his ideas, actions and thinking 

have been definitively shaped by his life-long association with the 

RSS and its family. Despite recent attempts to present him simply as an 

efficient leader committed to investment and development, he remains 

proud of his membership of the RSS and actively espouses its Hindutva 

worldview. This is hardly surprising as he has been consistently associated 

with the RSS and its family since the age of eight, and his commitment to 

the RSS is amply demonstrated by a recapitulation of his career within it. 1 

1 On his RSS history, see K. Nag, The NaMo Story: a political life, New Delhi: Roli Books, 2013; N. 

Mukhopadhyay, Narendra Modi: the man, the times, New Delhi: Tranquebar Press, 2013 (Kindle 

edition). 


13

After receiving RSS training at its headquarters in Nagpur Modi took charge of the Akhil Bharatiya 

Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the RSS, in Gujarat. 2 His next assignment, from 1971 

onwards, was as a full-time worker and propagator (pracharak) for the RSS at its Gujarat headquarters. In 

1973, he was assigned a key role by the RSS in the organisation of a major VHP gathering (sammelan) in 

Gujarat. During the so-called ‘Emergency’ period declared by Indira Gandhi from 1975-77, Modi worked 

in the RSS’s national underground network and wrote a book in Gujarati on the RSS’s role during the 

‘Emergency’. In the 1980s, Modi rose up the RSS ranks in Gujarat from being a divisional (sub-regional) 

full-time worker to the assistant organisational head and a zonal office bearer. He also undertook coordination 

activities among the RSS family of organisations, including its student wing and the VHP, and was 

in charge of the RSS’s publications operations in Gujarat. 

Up to the early 2000s, the RSS actively promoted Modi’s political career, including his campaign to become 

Chief Minister of Gujarat in 2001. In 1987, Modi was one of the first full-time workers sent by the 

RSS to work for the BJP and in 1989 he became general secretary of the Gujarat BJP. Prior to this, he was 

involved in organising the campaign that led to the BJP’s victory in the Ahmedabad municipal elections. 

He became National Secretary of the BJP in 1995 and General Secretary for Organisation for the BJP at 

all-India level in 1998. 

In these various capacities Modi was centrally involved in the deeply communal and divisive Hindu supremacist 

campaigns of the 1980s, including the infamous chariot ‘pilgrimage’ (Rath Yatra) of the BJP 

and VHP from Gujarat to Ayodhya in 1990. 3 The campaign explicitly aimed to ‘retake’ the sixteenth-century 

Babri mosque, claiming it was the birthplace of the Hindu deity Ram. The Rath Yatra led to considerable 

violence throughout India and eventually the destruction of the mosque by Sangh Parivar volunteers 

in 1992. Similarly, in 1991 Modi had been a key organiser in the RSS and VHP’s Ekta ‘pilgrimage’ 

(unity pilgrimage) campaign across India (from Kanyamumari to Kashmir), aimed at reclaiming the nation 

as Hindu and in the process terrorising minorities; Modi was the ‘charioteer’ in this latter ‘pilgrimage’ 

and organised the ‘saffron army’ (kesariya vahini) of youth, from the RSS student wing and the extremely 

violent Bajrang Dal, for this campaign. 4 Similarly, Modi was involved in the organisation of another farright 

‘pilgrimage’ campaign in 1997 from Bombay to Delhi which was aimed at making Muslims accept 

their secondary status under Hindutva ideology. 5 

After he became Gujarat’s Chief Minister in 2001, relations between the RSS and Modi became strained. 

The key reason was the RSS’s tradition that its affiliates, including the BJP, must remain essentially subservient 

to the RSS and report to or consult with the RSS state or national leadership on all important 

2 K. Nag, ibid, page 42. 

3 N. Mukhopadhyay, op cit (Kindle edition). 

4 N. Mukhopadhyay, ibid (Kindle edition) 

5 N. Mukhopadhyay, ibid (Kindle edition) 


decisions. Modi’s increasing power and authoritarianism in Gujarat 

after 2002 meant that the RSS’s expectations about Modi’s 

subservience were not met. Nevertheless, positive relations 

resumed again following the RSS’s decisive support for Modi’s 

campaign to be accepted as the BJP’s candidate for Prime Ministership 

in 2012. 6 

Partly because of the international condemnation of the violence 

in Gujarat and the persistent and wide-spread allegations of his 

complicity, Modi has felt the need to generate a massive and 

diverse international public relations campaign in his favour. 7 This 

has spawned a veritable cult of personality centred on Modi being 

diffused by the extensive network of RSS supporters in India, 

UK, US and elsewhere; by international public relations firms; 

by the so-called ‘Modibots’ (a dedicated army of zealots who 

bombard electronic and social media sites that post any criticism 

of Narendra Modi); and by some UK and US politicians, such 

as Barry Gardiner MP. The image presented, through considerable 

effort, is of Narendra Modi as an exceptionally and uniquely 

competent, business-friendly leader (see ‘Don’t Believe the Hype: 

Modi’s Model of Governance’). This has erased entirely his RSS 

affiliation, commitment to Hindutva political ideology, blatant 

antipathy towards minorities, and the barbarity of the Gujarat 

carnage (See ‘Narendra Modi’s Culpability in the Gujarat Genocide: 

A Factsheet’). This veritable public relations blitzkrieg has 

muddled even liberal opinion, which has been stumped by the deliberate 

Hindutva strategy of shrieking ‘anti-Hindu’, ‘anti-Indian’ 

or ‘anti-Gujarati’ whenever Modi or extremist Hindutva ideology 

is criticised. 

‘‘All our efforts have therefore 

to be concentrated in 

the direction of generating 

invincible national strength 

by making our people 

nationally conscious and 

moulding them for a welldisciplined, 

coordinated 

and invincibly powerful 

national entity, which alone 

is the ultimate sanction for 

a free and glorious national 

life on the face of this 

earth’. 

M.S. Golwalkar, 

Bunch of Thoughts, Part 3, 

Ch. 22 

Even within the spectrum of Hindutva politics, Narendra Modi’s 

political career has continually and glaringly demonstrated the 

most strident, intolerant and divisive of Hindutva tendencies. In 

the aftermath of the Gujarat carnage, he callously referred to the 

relief camps for Muslims victims of the carnage as ‘baby-making 

factories’, also making use of a hateful anti-Muslim slogan that 

each Muslim man has 4 wives and 25 children. His use of deeply 

6 N.Mukhopadhyay, ibid., K. Nag, op cit. 

7 R. Ayyub (2013), ‘Modi’s Operandi’, Tehelka, no.14, vol.10, (13 April) http://www.tehelka. 

com/modis-operandi/ 


15

sectarian language against Christians and Muslims has been a consistent theme. 

In 2012, ten years after the Gujarat atrocities (for which he has refused to apologise or bear responsibility 

of any sort), he compared his own position to that of a passenger in a car that runs over a puppy 

– ‘of course it will be painful’, he said, while adding that he had no guilty feeling about the events. 

These views of Modi’s are part of a clear pattern of intolerant speech and action exhibited throughout 

his political career to demean non-Hindus while rousing the most chauvinistic, hate-driven and 

violent Hindu supremacism. 



17

Two 

Narendra Modi’s culpability in the 

Gujarat Genocide: A Factsheet 

Suresh Grover, Director, The Monitoring Group and 

Prof. Gautam Appa, Professor Emeritus, London School of Economics and 

• 58 people, mainly Hindu zealots, died on 27 February 2002 when a train coach caught fire at 

Godhra station in Gujarat. A commission of inquiry set up by the Union cabinet concluded in 2005 

that the fire was an accident. Another inquiry set up by Modi’s government said in 2008 that it was a 

pre-planned conspiracy. 

• What did Modi do after visiting the site of the burn train on 27 February 2002? 

a) Declared, within hours and without any investigation or intelligence reports, that this was a conspiracy 

by Godhra Muslims and the Pakistani Intelligence agency ISI. 

b) Handed over the charred bodies to the VHP (a Hindu Nationalist extremist organisation) who 

paraded them 85 miles away in Ahmedabad, the commercial capital of Gujarat, drumming up anti- 

Muslim hysteria in the state. 

c) Let BJP, his political party, support a call from VHP for a Gujarat-wide closure (Bandh) for three 

days. 

d) Called a meeting of senior police officers at his residence to instruct them not to interfere with 

Hindu mobs’ reaction to this action by Muslims. 

e) Stopped the army from intervening to end the violence for 3 days. 

• A massacre of Muslims followed over 3 days in which: 

a) A systematic genocide left more than 2000 dead. 

b) Muslim women were particular targets of violence - many were assaulted with weapons, raped, 

butchered and burnt alive. 

c) Despite repeated calls, the police refused to help Muslims. Even Ehsan Jafri, a Muslim Congress 

ex-MP, was brutally butchered along with his neighbours in Gulberg Housing Society in Ahmedabad. 

d) Three British Muslims – Mohammad Aswat and Saeed and Sakil Dawood – travelling in Gujarat 

were killed. Another, Imran Dawood, survived after being left for dead 

e) Over 200,000 Muslims lost their homes and ended up in refugee camps 


• Since then 

a) Several human rights bodies - Human Rights Watch, National Human Rights Commission, 

National Commission for Minorities, Citizens’ Tribunal, Amnesty International, etc. - have castigated 

Modi and his government for allowing the massacre. 

b) Until 2012 Britain had banned Modi coming here for an official visit. EU countries had followed 

suit. In August 2012, when it seemed likely that Modi will become the prime ministerial candidate of 

the main opposition party BJP in India the British High Commissioner met with him and EU countries 

also lifted their ban. 

c) In 2005 the US State department revoked Modi’s business and tourist visas because of his involvement 

in “serious violations of religious freedom.” On 12 February 2014, the US ambassador has 

sought a meeting with him, effectively ending the US government’s boycott of Modi. No explanation 

with respect to his earlier “serious violations of religious freedom” were offered. 

d) The Supreme Court of India (SC) has condemned Modi’s government as ‘modern-day Neros 

[who] were looking elsewhere when innocent children and helpless women were being burnt and were 

probably deliberating how the perpetrators can be saved.’ 

e) Showing no faith in the Modi government’s impartiality SC has moved many riot-related court 

cases away from Gujarat, appointed a Special Investigative Team (SIT) to look into Modi’s culpability 

for the riots and an Amicus Curiae to make an independent assessment of the findings of the SIT. 

f) Maya Kodnani, a BJP MLA who was appointed minister for Women and Child Development by 

Modi (despite pending allegations of her involvement in the riots) has been convicted of murder and 

conspiracy to commit murder and sentenced to 28 years in prison in the case relating to one of the 

more infamous massacres during the riots. 

g) An appeal is being lodged against Gujarat magistrate court’s verdict accepting SIT’s conclusion 

that there was insufficient prosecutable evidence against Modi. Arguments will now be heard in the 

Gujarat High Court. 

h) Imran Dawood, survivor of the attack in February 2002, has instructed lawyers to use his affidavit 

to arrest Modi should he enter the UK. However such an action would have to be agreed by the 

Attorney General. 


19

three 

The Murder of British Citizens in a Genocide Forgotten 

Suresh Grover - Director of the Monitoring Group 

Summary 

• On February 28 2002, four British Muslims driving through Gujarat, and their local Muslim 

driver, were attacked by a murderous Hindu mob near Prantij. Only one of them, Imran Da 

wood, survived the incident. 

• The Gujarat Police, in whose presence much of the incident took place, refused to assist 

the party. After the incident, they conducted a slipshod investigation and refused, for many 

months to either interview or arrest the suspects who had carried out the carnage. 

• Only after pressure was applied by the Dawood family and the British Deputy High Commis 

sioner was it possible to arrest and charge anyone. The progress of the case, however, contin 

ues to be obstructed by the judicial system in Gujarat. Among other factors, this is because of 

the fact that the public prosecutor was a Sangh Parivar activist. 

• The Dawood family, since 2002, has chosen to seek justice through a campaign that uses legal 

options and international pressure. Their aim is to both convict those guilty of murdering the 

tourists and driver but also those who created the conditions for the outbreak of the genocide. 

• The Dawood family are currently proceeding with a criminal case against the members of the 

mob and a civil case against Narendra Modi and members of his cabinet for acts of commis 

sion and omission that led to the fatal events of February 2002. 

• The BJP government since coming to power in 1998 had taken numerous actions to marginal 

ize and victimize minorities in the state. Narendra Modi, appointed Chief Minister in 2001, 

continued these actions. 

• Narendra Modi’s personal culpability for the anti-Muslim genocide of 2002 is well established 

by his actions and speech on February 27 and immediately after. This includes raising com 

munal passions through baseless allegations, supporting a bandh (closure) called by the VHP 

on 28 February and 1 March, and instructing the police to take no action against Hindus dur 

ing these days. 

• The manner with which the UK Government has chosen to engage with Modi and in 

particular the role of prominent MP’s such as Barry Gardiner is in stark contrast to British 

interests and values. A dubious “clean chit” has been peddled to whitewash the facts and 

win favour with Narendra Modi, putting economic expediency beforemoral responsibility. 

HM Goverrnment imposed a 12 year ban on Narendra Modi for justifiable reasons and 

must uphold the rights of our citizens to justice. 


In February 2002 two brothers from Batley, Yorkshire – Sakil and Saeed Dawood – went to India with 

their childhood friend Mohammed Aswat and their 18-year-old nephew, Imran Dawood. While returning 

from an excursion trip to fulfill a childhood dream – to see the majestic beauty of the Taj Mahal – 

their joyous adventure turned into a nightmare. What follows is a harrowing and haunting account of 

a frenzied mob set on murdering individuals for no other reason than their religion and the subsequent 

momentous struggle by the Dawood family for justice for their loved ones and others who perished in 

the genocidal violence. 

At about 6 p.m. on the evening of 28 th February 2002, the four British tourists were travelling in a jeep 

with a local driver, Yusuf Paregar, on one of Gujarat’s main highways. Hours after crossing the Gujarat 

state border, as they entered the town of Prantij, they could see smoke emanating from buildings a few 

hundred yards off the highway. At this time they passed a police vehicle that contained two police officers. 

They asked these police officers whether it was safe to continue their journey. Upon receiving a confirmation 

that it was safe to continue, they moved on but the driver remained anxious. He stopped for a while 

and then started driving slowly. Suddenly they encountered a mob that had set up a roadblock. A coach 

ahead of them that had been stopped, left without being troubled by the mob. The car immediately in 

front of them was then stopped. That car too was allowed to proceed. Next, their vehicle was stopped 

by the mob. 

At first Imran and his companions were asked to hand over a bottle of water. The driver handed over a 

bottle of water. The person that had received the bottle emptied the bottle of its contents and poured 

petrol into it. The driver was then asked where they were from and whether they were Muslims. Then, 

some of the mob members noticed that their vehicle had Arabic inscriptions and proceeded to attack the 

vehicle and its occupants. The driver attempted to drive off but the mob chased them, some on foot and 

others on motorcycles. As their vehicle moved further they encountered another mob. A large log had 

been laid across the road which the driver avoided by swerving off and then back on it. Having now noticed 

that there were greater numbers of people in the distance, the driver turned the vehicle around and 

tried to flee backwards. Unfortunately, their vehicle stalled. The mob caught up to them and dragged the 

driver out. Fearing for their lives, Imran and his companions left the vehicle and began running towards 

a farmhouse two hundred meters away. Near the farmhouse, an elderly lady was washing clothes. They 

asked for her assistance. She refused and asked them to leave. Soon after this, the tourists were cornered 

by a mob of about twenty people. 

A frantic discussion took place, during which people were heard saying that the tourists should be killed as 

they were Muslims. Saeed and Sakil pleaded with them and showed them their passports and British currency 

to prove they were tourists and had no quarrel with the mob. Imran was stabbed in the leg, kicked 

and hit on the head. Mohammed Aswat was being beaten viciously and Imran went to help him. He held 

Aswat, who then fell to the ground. Both Sakil and Saeed were also being attacked by the mob. In a dazed 

and injured state, Imran managed to scramble away with Aswat in his arms. 


21

The Dawoods’ burnt jeep inspected by the Gujarat police 

weeks after the incident 

by Dawood family archive 

‘What happened in Gujarat 

was not a spontaneous 

uprising, it was a 

carefully orchestrated attack 

against Muslims. The 

attacks were planned in 

advance and organized 

with extensive 

participation of the police 

and state government officials.’ 

Smita Narula, senior South 

Asia researcher for Human 

Rights Watch, May 2002 

At this point, the police arrived on the scene, almost thirty minutes 

after the initial incident. The police helped Imran into their vehicle 

and then placed the motionless Aswat in the back. Imran pleaded 

with the police to help his uncles nearby. They refused but promised 

to come back in ten minutes. The police then took Imran and 

Aswat to the nearby Public Health Care Center. Mohammad Aswat 

was declared dead on arrival. In the meantime, the driver had been 

beaten to death by the mob, his body thrown onto the jeep and both 

set alight. Imran Dawood woke up next morning only to learn that 

his uncles were still missing and the police, despite their promise, had 

made no effort to go back to scene and search for them. 

Had the local police acted professionally, these murders could have 

been prevented. The police could have alerted the tourists not to 

travel into the danger area when asked by the driver. The initial attack 

on the jeep and the subsequent chase of the victims by the mob 

took place within eyeshot of the police, who were no more than two 

hundreds yards away. Finally, it took them more than thirty minutes 

to intervene and then only partially. 

The investigation into the crime against Imran and his companions 

was deliberately negligent and designed to hide the real culprits. The 

police had failed to visit the scene of crime, secure any forensic evidence, 

interview any witnesses or identify any perpetrators. 

In fact it was Imran’s cousin Bilal Dawood who, accompanied by the 

representative of the British Deputy High Commissioner in Mumbai, 

searched the scene of the crime and recovered the human bones 

which were later matched by the DNA fingerprinting Centre in Hyderabad 

and found to be those of Saeed Dawood. Despite the fact 

that the initial police report was filed on 28 February 2002, the perpetrators 

were not interviewed until late April that year. That too was 

at the insistence of the Dawood family. 

It was only under pressure from the family and the British Deputy 

High Commissioner that, in late April 2002, six people were finally 

charged with the murders. Given the serious nature of the charges, 

bail was initially refused to the suspects. But bail was granted at the 

higher court as the application of the perpetrator, shockingly, remained 

unopposed by the public prosecutor. The latter, it turned 

out, was a well-known member of the Sangh Parivar. 


He was only relived of his prosecution duties when he became a judge about a year later. 

It was under these circumstances, in 2002, that the family decided to launch a campaign combining 

international public pressure with a legal strategy in India. They sought to both ensure a thorough and 

proper investigation into the specific crimes against the tourists and the driver, and to hold to account 

those responsible for creating the political and social environment that fostered the genocidal violence 

in 2002. In his ongoing civil suit for damages in India, Imran Dawood has named Narendra Modi, Gujarat’s 

Chief Minister, and eight of his senior Government officers as among the accused for facilitating 

or encouraging genocidal violence or failing to act, given their legal and constitutional duties, to prevent 

the violence. As the Dawood submission to the court states, “The murderous attack on the Plaintiff 

and his companions was part of a pattern of state-wide attacks against Muslims in Gujarat on and from 

27th February 2002, directly on account of acts of omission and commission by the Defendant Nos. 1 

to 7, which resulted in the injury, death and destruction of their properties, desecration of places of religious 

worship, economic boycott and humiliation by rampant rape and brutalisation of Muslim women 

and children, denial of rehabilitation measures and denial of justice”. 

The evidence of culpability against Narendra Modi et. al. is extensive and can be summarized 

as follows: 

In total opposition to the values of equality enshrined in the Indian Constitution, the Sangh Parivar 

espouse a right wing Hindutva ideology with the ultimate aim of creating a Hindu State in India. There 

is clear evidence to show that all the affiliates of the Sangh Parivar and its leaders took active part in the 

anti-Muslim genocide of 2002 with the full support of the Chief Minister. The policies pursued by the 

BJP as soon as they assumed power in Gujarat in 1998 reflected a systemic pattern of marginalizing, excluding 

and targeting minority communities, including the Muslim community in the state. For instance, 

in July 1998 the state department set up a police cell for monitoring inter-religious marriages. This was 

justified by the then State Home Minister, Haren Pandya on the grounds that such marriages were not 

made out of free choice but were forced on Hindu women. This was coupled with the disbanding of the 

police cell set up to investigate atrocities against women. Additionally, In February 1999, a circular was 

issued by the Director General of Police (Intelligence) to collect selective information about Christians 

and Muslims. This circular was challenged by several organizations in the Gujarat High Court. However 

it has still not been cancelled. From 1998 onwards there was a striking policy of withdrawing Muslim 

officers from field postings as far as possible. There was also an effort to sidestep the normal recruitment 

process for police by appointing police sahayaks (assistants), who were cadre of the Sangh Parivar. 

These sahayaks were later drafted into the police service thereby subverting the recruitment procedure. 

The Gujarat Government also used the Home Guard force as a means to induct VHP and Bajrang Dal 

cadre into the law enforcement machinery to ensure its compliance and obedience to the Sangh Parivar, 

thereby subverting the rule of law and all constitutional norms. The State administration was also keen 

to influence educational material, introducing ideas from Sangh Parivar ideology into social studies text- 


23

ooks. For instance: “Muslims, Christians and Parsees are foreigners”, 

“The varna system [basis of the caste system] is the best gift to 

mankind” and the glorifying of Fascism and Nazism with a view to 

justify the exclusion and violence against minorities and to polarize 

the population in the State on the grounds of religion. 

Top Row 3rd from Right: Mohammed Aswat. 

Bottom Row from Left: 

Sakil Dawood, Saeed Dawood, Imran Dawood 

‘I would like to go back to 

Gujarat. I would like to go 

back and hopefully make 

a change. Hopefully make 

a change and try to help 

people in bettering their 

lives. Giving them opportunities 

that they haven’t had. 

Maybe by doing this it will 

help me and help my family… 

it will make me 

stronger. Basically I want to 

shed light rather than darkness 

in Gujarat.’. 

Imran Dawood 

2014 

Narendra Modi, a former pracharak (worker) of the RSS was appointed 

Chief Minister of Gujarat in October 2001 and subsequently 

elected on the BJP ticket. He continued and intensified the discriminatory 

policies enforced from 1998 onwards. Indeed, between 

October 2001 and February 2002, the VHP openly organized Trishul 

Diksha Samarohs (lit. Trident Consecration Ceremonies) in the state. 

At these, communal passions were incited by raising anti-Muslim and 

anti-Christian slogans, distribution of trishuls (tridents) and guptis 

(daggers) and advocating violence against minorities. During the 

same period, October 2001 to February 2002, venomous pamphlets 

advocating the economic boycott and annihilation of the Muslim 

community were widely distributed, intending to and succeeding in 

creating a communal rift among people. In January 2002, the State 

Government issued a circular directing schools to conduct Hindu 

pujas (services), including the chanting of Sanskrit shlokas (religious 

verses) and lighting of diyas (lamps) to mark the anniversary of the 

earthquake in Bhuj, Gujarat. It also warned of adverse action if institutions 

did not follow the instructions. This circular was in breach 

of earlier High Court orders that prevented public institutions from 

following narrow political agendas. 

On 15 January 2002, the VHP announced mass mobilization in Gujarat 

for its Ayodhya agitation. This resulted in the movement of 

thousands of karsevaks (volunteers) from Gujarat to Ayodhya. On 

7 February, the State Intelligence Bureau alerted all Superintendents 

and Commissioners of police in the State about the movement of 

karsevaks by train on 22 February 2002 to Ayodhya. 

The State Intelligence services had also repeatedly alerted the Uttar 

Pradesh (UP) State Police authorities about the number of karsevaks 

who had left the State for Ayodhya by train. Thus, if necessary, 


preventative action could have been taken against any incidence of violence when the karsevaks returned 

from Ayodhya. 

When the Ahmedabad-bound Sabarmati Express started its journey from Ayodhya it was carrying 

nearly 2000 passengers on board, almost double its capacity of 1,100. Nearly 1,700 people on board 

were karsevaks. The media and the press had reported instances of violence occurring in UP due to 

clashes between karsevaks and local persons on railway stations. This in itself should have been a cause 

for concern and ought to have alerted the State intelligence to take preventative measures. But no such 

measures were considered or implemented. On the 27th of February 2002 at about 8 am, the S-6 coach 

of the Sabarmati Express was burnt down, resulting in the tragic death of fifty-eight people, mostly 

Hindus, at Godhra railway station. The cause of the burning of the coach and consequent deaths is 

still to be judicially ascertained. However, there was no evidence that the burning of the carriage was 

premeditated. In fact, the local District Collector of Godhra, Jayanti Ravi, issued a statement, which was 

broadcast repeatedly from 8 am to 7 pm that day, to the effect that the Godhra fire was not pre-planned. 

In reality, despite the social media reportage of the incident, Gujarat was relatively peaceful until the 

evening of 27 February 2002. 

Narendra Modi and some of his cabinet colleagues arrived at Godhra at about 2 pm on 27 February 

2002. Against the advice of the local administration, Modi took a decision to transport the charred bodies 

of the passengers of the Sabarmati Express to Ahmedabad. His initial plan was to not remove the 

bodies from the train but take the train with the dead bodies to the capital. However, to gain maximum 

publicity and media coverage, he and his colleagues decided to take the bodies in an open motor cavalcade 

to Ahmedabad. At about 7.30 pm that day, without any evidence to back it, Modi made a public 

broadcast in which he announced that ISI, the Pakistani intelligence agency, was behind the Godhra 

incident. He described Godhra as, ‘a preplanned, violent act of terrorism’. On the same day, in an interview, 

Praveen Togadia, International General Secretary of the VHP, stated ‘this has never happened 

in the history of Independent India. Hindu society will avenge the Godhra killings. Muslims should accept 

the fact that Hindus are not wearing bangles. We will respond vigorously to all such incidents’. The 

next day, Modi said on Doordarshan, the Indian state TV channel, ‘Gujarat shall not tolerate any such 

incident. The culprits will get full punishment for their sins. Not only this, we will set an example that 

nobody, not even in his dreams, thinks of committing a heinous crime like this’. The statements became 

the basis of a pogrom, of genocidal intent, against all Muslims in Gujarat. 

In order to facilitate the spreading of violence from Godhra to the rest of Gujarat and to paralyse the 

state machinery, the VHP called for state-wide bandh (closure of all shops and business and standstill 

of all public transport). Despite the fact that the courts have held bandhs to be illegal, Modi, in total 

defiance of his constitutional and legal duties, announced and promoted a Gujarat-wide bandh the next 

day. He would have known and foreseen that such action would lead to breakdown of the state 


25

machinery and failure to maintain the rule of law. Indeed, all the reliable evidence suggests that Modi went 

further by calling two separate meetings about the official response: the first with his senior police officials 

and the second with senior Ministers. In both he allegedly gave specific instructions that resulted in the complete 

absence of police action and intervention against mobs unleashing wanton violence upon the Muslim 

community on 28 February 2002. Indeed central police control rooms were taken over by at least two cabinet 

members, Ashok Bhatt and I.K. Jadeja, in direct violation of normal procedure. As a consequence, repeated 

pleas for help were ignored or turned down by the police. This gross political interference was also used to 

monitor the response of police officers and to ensure the release of mob leaders and known supporters of 

the Sangh Parivar. 

Although the army was called in, it was deliberately not deployed for the first seventy-two hours - crucial 

hours when the violence and the pogrom against Muslims was at its height. Had the army been deployed 

properly, the threat of violence would have subsided. 

Even though the violence continued till May 2002 in various parts of the state, it was in the first seventy two 

hours that most damage was done and gross violence unleashed against an unprepared, vilified and vulnerable 

Muslim community. Muslims from all strata were targeted. Mobs, led by known leaders of the Sangh 

Parivar attacked Muslims and their properties to carry out what can only be described as “ethnic cleansing”. 

The leaders of the mobs had computerized sheets of names and addresses of Muslim homes and establishments. 

The Sangh Parivar’s involvement was confirmed in an interview with the President of the VHP, K.K. 

Shastri, who told the journalist, “We were terribly angry over Godhra. Hindutva was attacked. This is… a 

terrible outburst that will be difficult to roll back”. And, “we can’t condemn it because they are our boys”. 

This carnage resulted in large-scale deaths, rapes, and grievous injury to the Muslim community. In addition, 

there was widespread destruction of their property, decimation of their places of worship and cultural 

symbols. It is estimated that across Gujarat over 1,100 Muslim owned hotels, homes of not less than 100,000 

families, over 15,000 small and big establishments, around 3,000 hand carts, and over 5,000 vehicles were 

badly damaged or destroyed. At the end of the violence 2000 Muslims had died. None of the predominately 

Muslim residential areas and housing compounds, including Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya, Chamanpura, 

Gomtipur and Pandarwada were spared. Each district has a harrowing and barbaric story of injury, rape and 

murder to tell. 

In contrast to the speed with which he went to Godhra, Modi refused to visit any of the affected areas or 

relief camps. When he chose to comment on the violence, Modi cited Newton’s Law of Motion: that every 

action has an equal and opposite reaction. (Zee TV, 1 March 2002). Far from adhering to his constitutional 

duty of preventing public anger or attacks on innocent people, Modi justified the violence as a ‘natural’ reaction 

to the Godhra incident. In the same vein, the VHP Vice President, Giriraj Kishore told the Times of 

India, ‘the violence during the bandh was a result of natural outpouring of anger and grief over the Godhra 

massacre.’ 


The grinding slow wheels of the Indian judicial system can exhaust and demoralise even the most robust 

victims of heinous crimes. The six defendants suspected of the murders were last in court in 2012 but 

the verdicts are yet to be announced. The civil suit for damages against Narendra Modi and his senior 

officials seems to be travelling at an even slower pace, facing continuous legal and procedural blockages 

from defendants’ lawyers. None of this has deterred the Dawood family or its supporters in India and 

the UK. The Dawood family campaign continues to be fought from a different continent some five 

thousand miles away. 

In October 2012 after ten years of operating a policy of boycott against Modi the British Government 

decided to reengage with him and his state government. Given the public support for the Dawood campaign 

the British Government was forced to acknowledge its importance. Hugo Swire, Minister for India 

at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, was forced in October 2012 to state that, even as they were 

meeting with Modi, “The UK has a broad range of interests in Gujarat. We want to secure justice for 

the families of the British nationals who were killed in 2002. We want to support human rights and good 

governance in the state”. 

It would be wise to note that as a direct consequence of Narendra Modi’s role in the 2002 pogrom, the 

Indian Supreme Court described him as a ‘modern day Nero’. The United States had, denied him a visa 

in 2005 with the statement that, “Chief Minister of Gujarat state Narendra Modi applied for, but was 

denied the diplomatic visa under section 212 (a) (2) (g) of the Act which makes any government official 

who was responsible for or directly carried out at any time, particularly severe violations of religious 

freedom, ineligible for visa.” In February of this year, however, without any explanation for why their 

previous statement regarding the violations of religious freedom is void, the US government has also 

followed the UK in resuming engagement with Modi. 

To be a future Indian Prime Minister, Modi desperately requires a new international image. To this end, 

he has even engaged the services of a global public relations company. Together with big multinationals, 

the UK Government has decided to break ranks with the international community’s boycott of Modi for 

its narrow economic interests. In this way, it has assisted in the effort to ‘rehabilitate, endorse and whitewash’ 

Modi’s image. The subsequent actions of the EU and US show that the effects of UK’s change 

of stance have been significant. This despite the fact that there are still cases ongoing against Modi and 

only recently Maya Kodnani, a senior Minister in Modi’s cabinet, was sentenced to 28 years for her role 

in the massacre at Naroda Patiya during the 2002 violence. She was described by the judge as a ‘Kingpin’ 

in incidents whose brutality is reflected in the murder of an infant, who was 20 days old. 

Human rights campaigners support trade and co-operation with Gujarat, but the current strategy – of 

seeking to increase trade by helping with Modi’s international image – is a form of ‘political bribery’ and 

a wholly unacceptable strategy which tarnishes UK’s own international image and contradicts the aspirations 

for good inter-community relations here in the UK. The Dawood family campaign’s patient and 

determined struggle for justice stands in sharp contrast to the UK government’s opportunistic embrace 

of Narendra Modi. 


27

four 

A Clean Chit? 

Has Narendra Modi been Absolved by the Supreme Court? 

Prof. Gautam Appa, Professor Emeritus, London School of Economics and 

Savitri Hensman, Writer 

Summary 

• Narendra Modi stands accused of a number of actions that fomented the Gujarat riots of 2002. 

These relate both to irresponsible and inflammatory statements, as well as concrete actions (such 

as instructing the police not to interfere with Hindu attacks on Muslims). 

• The case against Narendra Modi has never been argued before the Supreme Court of India (SC). 

So the question of a clean chit by the SC of India does not even arise. 

• At present an appeal is being lodged in the Gujarat High Court to overturn the decision of a Guja 

rat Magistrate’s Court not to charge Modi for his role in the riots of 2002. 

• The key case relates to the brutal massacre of Muslims in Gulberg Housing Society in Ahmed 

abad. Ehsan Jafri, an ex-MP and prominent Gujarat State Congress leader, was among those 

butchered by the mob. His widow, Zakia Jafri is one of the main parties bringing the case against 

Modi. 

• The SC has, so far, seemed keen to ensure that all possibilities, including Modi’s culpability, can 

be thoroughly considered. 

• The SC has ordered a number of actions to ensure an impartial process, including censuring the 

state government for their actions during the riots and moving cases relating to the riots to courts 

outside Gujarat. 

• A Special Investigative Team (SIT) was appointed by the SC to look into the question of whether 

a criminal case could be made out against Modi in 2009. After reviewing its initial actions, SC ap 

pointed an amicus curiae – Raju Ramachandran – to look into the SIT’s operations. 

• The amicus and SIT, both mere advisers to SC, have made opposing recommendations based on 

the same evidence. The SIT has suggested that there is insufficient evidence to proceed with a 

criminal case against Modi. Ramachandran has suggested that prima facie grounds for proceeding 

with a criminal case do exist. 

• The case against Modi in India’s courts is ongoing. To claim now that he has been given a clean 

chit is at best an attempt at obfuscation and at worst a cynical disregard of human rights viola 

tions. 


Both Barry Gardiner and Shailesh Vara, chairs of the Labour and Tory ‘friends’ of India respectively, have 

claimed that the Supreme Court of India (SC) has given a clean chit to Modi over his culpability for the 

riots in Gujarat in 2002. Nothing can be further from the truth. 

The first thing to note is that there has never been a case against Modi in the SC. Consequently, SC has 

never directly pronounced on his guilt or innocence. In this formal sense the question of a clean chit by 

the SC does not even arise! The matter has, so far, only been considered in lower courts. Furthermore, his 

escape from prosecution so far is based upon possibly ‘insufficient evidence’, not absence of evidence. 

The question being considered in Indian courts is whether there is prosecutable evidence against Modi to 

establish criminal liability for his role in the 2002 riots which claimed the lives of over 2000 people including 

three British citizens. The allegation is that he masterminded the riots, initially, by allowing charred 

bodies of 58 Hindu victims of the Godhra train fire to be paraded in the streets of Ahmedabad (the commercial 

capital of Gujarat) on 28 February 2002. He went on to support a Gujarat bandh (strike/closure) 

announced by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a Hindu fundamentalist organisation. Furthermore, 

during a private meeting at his residence he asked senior police officers to not interfere if Hindus sought 

revenge and had two cabinet colleagues placed in the central police control rooms to ensure compliance. 

Finally, he prevented the army from intervening for three days. 

The case going through the lower courts in Gujarat at the moment has been brought by Zakia Jafri, the 

widow of Ehsan Jafri a former MP and State Congress party member living in Gulberg Housing Society in 

Ahmedabad. The massacre at Gulberg Housing Society is one of the most gruesome incidents of the riots 

of 2002. As news of the slaughter of Muslims following the Godhra train fire started trickling through in 

Ahmedabad on 28 February, scores of frightened Muslim neighbours gathered for safety in the home of 

Ehsan Jafri believing that he would have the connections to be able to ensure the safety of those around 

him. As a violent mob advanced on the Gulberg Society, repeated phone calls were made to police and 

political authorities – in Ahmedabad, in Delhi, and even to Modi himself - pleading for help. None came, 

even though police were present in the area. Eventually Ehsan Jafri and 68 others were massacred, many of 

them burnt alive. According to eye witnesses Jafri’s severed head was hoisted on a trident. 

Zakia Jafri set out to bring to account those she believed were responsible for her husband’s death. In India, 

when police are told that a crime has been committed, they are required to write up a First Information 

Report (FIR). In 2006, she made a complaint that the police had refused to register FIRs against Narendra 

Modi and others in the Gujarat government for allegedly allowing the massacre. 

In 2008, the SC intervened, ordering that the Gulberg Society case and several others relating to killings in 

Gujarat in 2002 be re-investigated. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was set up under RK Raghavan, a 

former head of India’s Central Bureau of Investigation, and was tasked by the SC with probing the alleged 

involvement of Narendra Modi. 


29

This investigation ran into problems. In 2010 the special public prosecutor 

working with SIT, RK Shah, resigned because he found it too difficult. He 

was reported as explaining: 

“Here I am collecting witnesses who know something about a gruesome 

case in which so many people, mostly women and children 

huddled in Jafri’s house, were killed and I get no cooperation. The 

SIT officers are unsympathetic towards witnesses, they try to browbeat 

them and don’t share evidence with the prosecution as they are 

supposed to do.” 1 

‘Someone else is 

driving a car and 

we’re sitting behind, even 

then if a puppy comes under 

the wheel, will it be 

painful or not? ’ 

Narendra Modi on whether 

he regrets the Gujarat riots, 

July 2013 

By the end of 2010 SIT had submitted three interim reports. In November 

2010, in order that a second opinion on the evidence collected by SIT be 

available, SC appointed an ‘amicus curiae’ (literally ‘friend of the court’) 

– experienced advocate Raju Ramachandran – to take a critical look at its 

findings. When the final reports of the SIT and the amicus curiae were 

submitted in 2012, it became apparent that there was a major difference 

of opinion. SIT concluded that ‘there was no reliable material available 

to prove that Modi had issued any instructions to the senior police officers 

on 27th Feb, 2002 to the effect that Hindus should be permitted to 

vent their anger’. Ramachandran disagreed. The main point of contention 

was whether to believe the testimony of Sanjiv Bhatt, a serving officer in 

the Indian Police Services (IPS) cadre of the State of Gujarat, who had 

stated that he was present at the said meeting and the Chief Minister Modi 

had made such statement. For various reasons SIT decided that Bhatt’s 

testimony was not reliable. In its absence, SIT concluded, there was not 

enough prosecutable evidence to proceed against Modi. Ramachandran 

took the view that ‘it would not be correct to disbelieve Bhatt at this prima 

facie stage’ and that Bhatt should be cross-examined in a trial to determine 

whether he is telling the truth or not. 

It is important to note that both the SIT and the Amicus Curiae have only 

an advisory role; neither conveys the view of the SC nor has any binding 

effect. Had the SIT concluded that there was prosecutable evidence against 

Modi, it would not have meant that Modi was guilty. At best it would have 

made his prosecution more likely. 

1 http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?264745 


SIT sought to close the case in July 2013, leading Modi and his supporters to claim that SC had 

given him a ‘clean chit’. But SC thought otherwise. It ordered that Zakia Jafri should be heard 

before the final decision. She filed a protest petition because SIT had ignored this order. Even 

though the petition was due for hearing in a Magistrate’s court, Gardiner and Vara declared in 

August 2013 that Modi had been given a ‘clean chit’ by the SC. They were wrong! On 26 December 

the Magistrate’s Court decided that SIT had come to the right conclusion and Modi should 

not be chargesheeted. Once again Modi and his supporters distorted the outcome to pronounce 

‘Satyamev Jayate’, i.e., truth had triumphed - he had been given a clean chit. 

But there is no closure yet for Modi. An appeal against the verdict of the Magistrate’s Court is 

being filed in the Gujarat High Court. Zakia Jafri, in her appeal has argued that there is strong 

evidence against Modi, that the SIT has ignored its own evidence and that the report of the 

Amicus Curiae, Ramchandran, was groundlessly rejected in the Magistrate’s court. Eventually the 

appeal will reach the SC which will decide whether a case should go ahead under the then existing 

criminal law in India. Until then claims of a ‘clean chit’ being handed to Modi by SC have no 

factual basis whatsoever. 

So what has the SC actually said about Modi and the Gujarat riots of 2002? All indications are 

that the SC has gone out of its way to prevent the ruling out of his culpability in the 2002 genocide 

of Muslims in Gujarat. It has: 

• halted the trials in 9 major riot cases and moved them outside the state. 

• declared his government ‘modern-day Neros, looking elsewhere when innocent 

children and helpless women were burning’. 

• appointed a SIT to probe the question of Modi’s guilt. 

• appointed an Amicus Curiae to probe SIT’s initial non-committal conclusion. 

In addition: 

V N Khare, a former chief justice of the SC, has said in an open court that ‘I would have lodged 

an FIR against Narendra Modi on charges of genocide and manslaughter’. 2 

2 See more at: http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2012/02/4566#sthash.gXypOxc0.dpuf 


31

‘The Gujarat 

Government had 

responded to the 

violence more swiftly 

and decisively than ever 

done before in any previous 

riots in the country.’ 

Narendra Modi after 

a Gujarat Magistrate’s 

court accepted 

SIT report 

December 2013 

An investigation carried out by a Citizens’ Tribunal, under the chairmanship 

of Justice Krishna Iyer (a former SC judge), had recorded Haren Pandya, 

Home Minister of Gujarat in 2002, stating that Modi called a meeting on the 

night of February 27, hours after the Godhra train attack. At this meeting, he 

directed the police to give free rein to the Hindus to act as they would. Pandya 

made his deposition to Justice H Suresh, a retired Bombay High Court 

judge and Justice PB Sawant, a former Supreme Court judge, on May 13, 

2002. Pandya was murdered on March 26, 2003. 

In a newspaper article in The Hindu of 15 Feb 2013, Markandey Katju, a 

former SC judge, declares: 

‘It is said by his supporters that Mr. Modi had no hand in 

the killings, and it is also said that he had not been found guilty by 

any court of law. I do not want to comment on our judiciary, but 

I certainly do not buy the story that Mr. Modi had no hand in the 

events of 2002. He was the Chief Minister of Gujarat at the time 

when horrible events happened on such a large scale. Can it be believed 

that he had no hand in them?’3 

A final point may be suggested. All that has been said so far relates to 

the strictly legal aspects of the case against Modi. It is important to maintain 

a distinction between moral failure and legal culpability. In India, as elsewhere, 

the level of proof required for a criminal conviction and difficulty 

of persuading witnesses to give evidence which might put them at risk means 

that powerful people are seldom convicted. The fact that a Supreme Courtappointed 

legal expert thinks there might be strong enough evidence to go to 

trial in this case is in itself remarkable. At the very least Modi presided over a 

situation when over 2000 people, overwhelmingly Muslims, were targeted and 

murdered. His actions since then have ignored the need for rehabilitation and, 

in fact, consistently increased the levels of alienation and marginalisation of 

the victims of the riots. At least one minister of his cabinet has been convicted 

of participating in the riots. Modi’s moral responsibility is manifest. 

We conclude by asserting that the claim that that the SC has given a 

clean chit to Modi is at best an attempt at obfuscation and at worst a cynical 

disregard of human rights violations. 

3 see http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/all-the-perfumes-of-arabia/article4415539.ece 



33

five 

Violence and Control: Modi, Hindutva and Women 

Pragna Patel, Director, Southall Black Sisters 

Summary 

• During the 2002 genocide, violence against women and children was deployed in a systematic 

and widespread fashion. Women’s bodies were made the grounds on which to symbolise the subjugation 

of the Muslim population. 

• Independent observers from India and elsewhere have taken note of the particular and unprecedented 

role of sexualised and non-sexualised forms of violence against women in the Gujarat genocide 

of 2002. 

• Modi’s administration did nothing to prevent the rape and violence. In many instances, the police 

and prominent figures within Modi’s administration were complicit in such acts. In the 

immediate aftermath of the genocide, Modi’s administration did nothing to rehabilitate or provide 

long-term support to survivors of sexual violence. 

• Modi’s administration did nothing to facilitate prosecutions of the perpetrators of sexual violence. 

On the contrary, it has consistently obstructed the investigations and attempts to bring to justice 

those responsible. The Supreme Court of India has upbraided the Gujarat Government for this. 

• The Sangh Parivar has a misogynistic and patriarchal view of women; they are considered to be 

subordinate and inferior to men. Women are infantalised and confined to very strict gender roles which 

perpetuate inequality and discrimination. 

• The Sangh Parivar has a militaristic and aggressive conception of Hindu masculinity. Sexualised 

violence and the control of women are central aspects in the construction of this masculinity and the 

Sangh Parivar ideology. 

• In his statements and practice, Modi has shown that he is formed by and fundamentally agrees 

with the Sangh Parivar’s ideology. 

• The position of women as a whole in Modi’s Gujarat has been poor and is deteriorating when 

viewed from a range of critical development and equality criteria. The position of women from minority 

and marginalised communities – Muslim, tribals and dalits – is worse. 


‘I have never known a riot which has used the sexual subjugation of women so widely as an 

instrument of violence as the recent mass barbarity in Gujarat’ 1 

‘Girls and women’s bodies were subjected to ‘almost inexhaustible violence, with infinitely plural 

and innovative forms’ of torture…’ ’ 

Rape and Violence against women as an instrument of subjugation 

It is now well established that between 28 February and 2 March 2002, the Gujarat State, its police and politicians 

directly participated in or stood by and watched Hindu rioters and mobs loot and burn down Muslim-owned 

property and kill, torture, rape and mutilate 2,000, mainly Muslim, men, women and children. 

There is considerable evidence to show that during the Gujarat genocide, 1 whilst Hindu slogans were chanted, 

Muslim women and girls in large numbers were systematically raped and then torched to death. Mass 

graves have revealed the mutilated bodies of Muslim women. Testimonies from survivors in refugee camps 

also describe how women and young girls were gang-raped, paraded naked in public, had instruments inserted 

into their bodies, were subjected to sexual assaults, had their breasts cut off, their vaginas and wombs 

sliced open and were beaten up with rods and pipes. Pregnant women were cut open and foetuses hung up 

on three-pronged trishuls (tridents that serve a symbolic Hindu religious function). In one case, several eyewitnesses 

testified that a pregnant woman was raped, tortured and her womb then slit open with a sword to 

disgorge the foetus, which was then hacked to pieces and burned with the mother. In another case a 3 year 

old girl was raped and killed in front of her mother. 2 

Many women victims of gang rape and other sexual assault were burnt whilst still alive. The burning of 

victims had the effect of depriving their families of the opportunity of burying them in accordance with 

Muslim burial rituals. By burning the victims, Hindu mobs sought to enforce a cultural form of disposing 

of the dead and to annihilate their culture and identity. 

Children of victims were also severely affected and traumatised by the violence. They were attacked while 

going to school, and many were intimidated and threatened when trying to resume their studies. 3 In mid- 

2002 at least 33,000 children, many of them orphans, were living in relief camps following the violence. 4 

That such violence against women was unleashed is not surprising given that the Sangh Parivar 5 in Gujarat 

1 ‘According to independent human rights observers, the events that transpired in Gujarat between February 28 and March 02 conform to the specifications 

of genocide… under the Second Article of the Genocide Convention of 1948 adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General 

Assembly on December 09 1948…’, Genocide in Gujarat: The Sangh Parivar, Narendra Modi and the Government of Gujarat, Coalition Against 

Genocide, March 02 2005. Available online at http://www.coalitionagainstgenocide.org/reports.php 

2 Justice, the victim, op cit. See also, “We Have No Orders to Save You”: State Participation and Complicity in Communal Violence in Gujarat, Human Rights Watch, 

April 2002 (http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/india/). Crime Against Humanity, Vol. II, pp. 38-43 and various testimonies and evidence in Vol. I, Concerned 

Citizens Tribunal (http://www.sabrang.com/tribunal/ ). 

3 The Next Generation: In the Wake of the Genocide: A Report on the Impact of the Gujarat Pogrom on Children and the Young, Citizens’ Initiative Ahmedabad, July 

2002 (http://www.coalitionagainstgenocide.org/reports.php) 

4 Crime Against Humanity, Vol II, Concerned Citizens Tribunal, p. 39 

5 ‘Sangh Parivar’ refers to a family of extremist Hindu organisations presided over by Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). It includes the Bharatiya 

Janata Party (BJP), Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Bajrang Dal and, in the UK, the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (see ‘Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh 

Parivar’). They have been involved in violence against Muslims and Christians in India. 


35

and elsewhere regularly puts out propaganda exhorting their members 

to defile, violate, and destroy women and girls from the minority community, 

who are seen as the main reproducers of Muslim and Christian 

religion and culture. For example, calls to rape Muslim women and 

girls were contained in a pamphlet produced by the VHP and RSS and 

distributed in Ahmedabad months before the violence started. 6 As the 

pamphlets indicate, women’s bodies were turned into battlefields in order 

to perpetrate hate and subjugate the whole Muslim community. 

‘You go to villages and 

forests of the country and 

there will be no such 

incidents of gang-rape 

or sex crimes. They are 

prevalent in some urban 

belts. The Indian ethos 

and attitude towards 

women should be 

revisited in the context of 

ancient Indian values.’ 

Mohan Bhagwat, 

Sarsangchalak 

(Supreme Leader) 

of RSS, 

January 2013 

A unique feature of the genocide in 2002 was that many Hindu women 

actively participated in, encouraged and even instigated the violence. 

Eyewitnesses have named several prominent women who took part in 

the violence including Maya Kodnani, an activist of the BJP, Modi’s 

political party. Kodnani was made Minister for Women and Child Development 

in the Gujarat government by Modi in 2007 even though 

he knew of her direct involvement in the genocide. She was eventually 

convicted of murder and conspiracy to commit murder and sentenced 

to 28 years in prison. 7 Modi’s endorsement of her led commentators to 

wryly observe that they now know what the Gujarat Model of ‘development’ 

means. 

Modi and the lack of state accountability 

The International Initiative for Justice in Gujarat and Amnesty International’s 

Stop Violence Against Women Report on Gujarat are some 

amongst many that have criticized the failure of Modi’s government to 

acknowledge and prevent the widespread sexual victimization of women 

or to provide adequate support and compensation in its aftermath. 8 Human 

rights observers have noted that there has been a blatant disregard 

for the rule of law at every level of state government. 9 

6 Justice, the victim, op. cit. Ch. 6. 

7 Clear evidence has emerged in respect of the direct involvement of Maya Kodnani in the communal 

violence. According to testimony backed by mobile phone records, she was present at a particularly 

gruesome incident of violence. Witnesses testified that she was distributing swords to Hindu rioters, 

exhorting them to attack Muslims, and at one point fired a pistol. Over 95 people were killed on that 

occasion, including women and children. See Reuters report available at http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/31/maya-kodnani-gujarat-verdict-idINDEE87U07P20120831. 

8 Amnesty International has released reports in 2007 and 2012 highlighting the inaction and failures 

of the Modi-led Gujarat Government with regards to both prosecution of those guilty in 2002 and 

rehabilitation of those affected. India: Five years on - the bitter and uphill struggle for justice in Gujarat, 

March 2007 (http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA20/007/2007/en) and India: A decade 

on from the Gujarat riots, an overwhelming majority of victims await justice in India, February 2012 

(http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA20/006/2012/en). 

9 For example the High Court in Gujarat closed the case of Bilkis Bano involving gang rape and the 

massacre of 14 family members. The blatant disregard for the rule of law led the Supreme Court to 


The following are some of the key failures that have been identified by Amnesty International: 10 

• The Gujarat government failed to curb the hate speech and inflammatory media and government 

propaganda in Gujarat which fuelled the violence and rapes (62-64); 

• The Gujarat police failed to protect women or arrest perpetrators of violence against women and girls 

(23-26); 

• The Gujarat police failed to register rape and sexual abuse charges and failed to investigate or collect 

medical evidence of rape and abuse (28-40); 

• The Gujarat trial courts failed to ensure justice for victims of rape and violence and instead frustrated 

attempts by victims to obtain a fair hearing at every level (40-51); 

• The Gujarat government failed to provide support, counselling and rehabilitation relief to victims of 

rape and sexual violence, despite the fact that the physical, psychological and financial consequence of such 

experiences will haunt them for many years and, for a significant number of women, for the rest of their lives 

(52-54); 

• The Gujarat government showed reluctance to cooperate with the judiciary and National Human 

Rights Commission. It resisted public scrutiny by intimidating witnesses and human rights activists who are 

campaigning for justice. 11 

In sum, impunity for violence against women was part of the systemic discrimination that women suffered 

before, during and after widespread violence. 

The sexual politics of Modi and the Sangh Parivar 

Since 2012, India has been rocked by a series of high profile gang rape cases that have highlighted the overall 

failure of the Indian state to provide women greater security, equality and justice. Modi and his Sangh Parivar 

allies continue to display a profoundly arrogant and misogynist approach to women’s rights. Indeed they view 

sexual violence as an inherent and intrinsic part of the Sangh Parivar project. 12 Chillingly, the incitement to 

sexual violence is seen as a means of proving the masculinity of the ‘Hindu’ man. 13 

They continue to see women not as fully fledged human beings with the inalienable right to exercise their 

own free will and choice but as vehicles for the expression of community honour and identity. 14 

direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to take over the case and transferred it to a special court in Mumbai so that it could be heard outside Gujarat. In 

the ‘Best Bakery Case’, the High Court in Gujarat failed to use its powers to direct and oversee the trial court process and investigative procedures. This and 

other failures led the Supreme Court in 2004 to rebuke the State government and Gujarat High Court while ordering the case transferred to neighbouring 

Maharashtra. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2004-04-15/ahmedabad/28324789_1_gujarat-high-court-affidavits-judgment 

10 All these are documented in Justice, the victim. Figures in brackets indicate the page number of that report. The 2012 follow-up statement by Amnesty 

International - India: A decade on from the Gujarat riots - points out that these aspects have still not been addressed. 

11 Discouraging Dissent: Intimidation and Harassment of Witnesses, Human Rights Activists and Lawyers Pursing Accountability for the 2002 Communal Violence in Gujarat, 

Human Rights Watch 

12 Threatened Existence: A Feminist Analysis of the Genocide in Gujarat, The International Initiative for Justice in Gujarat, 2003 

13 An interim Report, The International Initiative for Justice in Gujarat, 19 December 2002. 

14 In the lead up to the recent communal riots in Uttar Pradesh, a key battleground in the upcoming general elections, the Sangh Parivar’s propagation of 

falsehoods about a ‘love jihad’ – plot by Muslims to woo and convert Hindu girls – and the consequent need to violently protect community honour was 


37

For example, the Sangh Parivar has supported the practice of sati and has publicly supported campaigns 

against choice in marriage. 15 

Modi subscribes to the Sangh Parivar’s patriarchal view of women as the property of their father, 

husbands or sons. 16 As a member of the RSS, he supports their goal to replace the legal and constitutional 

rights of women in India with the Hindu law of Manu which teaches that women are 

subordinate to men from cradle to grave. Recently, for example, the Modi government was caught 

in a major political scandal involving the use of state resources to place a young woman under 

surveillance at the behest of her father without her consent. 17 

As has been discussed elsewhere, the Human Development Indicators for Gujarat give lie to the 

illusion of an ‘economic miracle’ (see ‘Don’t Believe the Hype: Modi’s Model of Governance). 

Modi has, in fact, presided over a state in which the position of women from all communities, 

especially in rural areas, have fallen behind those of many other states in India. The position of 

Muslim and other marginalised women has deteriorated even further. 

Between 2011 and 2012 the sex ratio of women per 1,000 men in Gujarat worsened from 920 to 

918 (way below the national average of 940). 18 Gujarat has one of the lowest conviction rates in 

crimes against women even though the rate of crimes has increased year after year. 19 69.7% of 

children up to the age of 5 are anaemic and 44.6% malnourished. 20 Female suicide rates in Gujarat 

showed a 10.5% increase in 2007 compared to the All India increase of 2.2%. 21 

one of the factors inciting clashes. http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/muzaffarnagar-love-jihad-beef-bogey-sparked-riotflames/article1-1120889.aspx 

15 The Sexual Politics of Modi, the BJP and the Sangh Parivar India United Against Fascism 28 October 2013 

16 The chief of the RSS Mohan Bhagwat recently stated at a public rally that, ‘A husband and wife are involved in a contract under which the 

husband has said that you should take care of my house and I will take care of all your needs. I will keep you safe.’ http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/woman-is-bound-by-contract-to-look-after-husband-bhagwat/1055559/ 

17 India United Against Fascism, “India Snoopgate and the Gujarat Model of Governance” 9 December 2013 (www.sacw.net/article6832. 

html). 

18 While most of the states in the country had an upward trend in dealing with India’s abysmal sex ratios, Gujarat is one of the three Indian 

states, besides Bihar and Jammu & Kashmir, which have a downward trend. See Pratik Sinha ‘Does RSS want women to become baby making 

machines?’ November 15, 2013 http://www.truthofgujarat.com/rss-want-women-become-baby-making-machines/ 

19 http://www.truthofgujarat.com/gujarats-abysmally-low-conviction-rates-crime-women-women-gujarat-get-justice/ 

20 Chandhoke, N. ‘Modi’s Gujarat and its little Illusion’. Economic and Political weekly. Vol XL VII, No. 49 (2012) 

21 http://www.deccanherald.com/content/325239/in-reality-modi-does-not.html 


Conclusion 

Modi’s true legacy in Gujarat is one of hatred, violence and divisiveness. Much as Modi and his supporters 

might try to manipulate his public image, they cannot hide his record as a Hindu supremacist 

whose profoundly patriarchal values underlie his continuing lack of remorse and compassion for 

those killed, raped and displaced. As Chief Minister of Gujarat, he cannot abdicate moral and political 

responsibility (even if he attempts to avoid legal responsibility) for what happened under his watch in 

2002. 

Modi has failed to uphold the constitution of India and the standard of due diligence under national 

and international laws and obligations to prevent grave human rights abuses. Overwhelming evidence 

shows that Modi has abused his power by using a combination of violence and terror tactics to destroy 

democracy and the rule of law. His model of governance has been described as that of a near 

–fascist dictatorship. 22 For this reason he is not fit for public office or for a place on the international 

stage as a world statesman. 

22 India United Against Fascism, “India Snoopgate and the Gujarat Model of Governance”, 9 December 2013 (www.sacw.net/article6832.html). 


39

six 

Don’t Believe the Hype: Modi’s Model of Governance 

Prof. Gautam Appa, Emeritus Professor, London School of Economics 

• Narendra Modi has been given undue credit as solely and uniquely responsible for the high level 

of growth in Gujarat. 

• On many indicators where India is amongst the worst-off in worldwide comparisons, Gujarat is 

nowhere near the top. In terms of gender imbalance, it is below the all India average and even 

below China. 

• There are also other indicators on which Gujarat compares unfavourably with other Indian states. 

Among these are the percentage of undernourished children, child sex ratio, percentage of 

households with toilets and women with severe anaemia. 

• The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has pointed to numerous instances where the Gujarat 

government has avoided proper procedure and foregone significant amounts of revenue, 

instead showering ‘undue’ benefits on some of the largest industrial houses of India – the Ambanis, 

Tatas, Birlas and Adani. 

• The findings of the CAG and rulings of the Gujarat High Court point to significant amounts of 

corruption among ministers of the Gujarat government. 

• A serving minister in Modi’s government has been imprisoned for illegal mining while another 

serving minister has been charged with the murder of a human rights activist who brought a case 

against him for illegal mining. 

• The excellent growth rates achieved by Gujarat ought not to be attributed to Modi alone. Gujarat 

has historically had large entrepreneurial communities and was already achieving high growth 

rates before Modi was made Chief Minister. 

• Gujarat has significant achievements in terms of the percentage of households with electricity, 

the percentage of government schools with electricity, the murder rate and the number of households 

owning two-wheelers. 

• Gujarat leads the country on a number of other counts: mob violence against Muslims and the 

number of ministers and senior police officers imprisoned for murder of innocent Muslims 

• Vapi, an industrial town in South Gujarat, has been declared the most polluted city in India. 


“We should all hope that chief minister Narendra Modi soon becomes the PM of India” says Basant Kumar 

Birla, the patriarch of Birla Group of companies. 1 And he is not alone. Mukesh Ambani, chairman of 

Reliance Industries, called Modi “a leader with a grand vision”, while his otherwise estranged brother Anil 

Ambani called him “a king among kings”. 2 A well-orchestrated campaign is underway to portray Modi as a 

miracle worker. He is made out to be responsible for high level of overall growth as well as a non-corrupt, 

non-bureaucratic and efficient administration delivering better education, health and wealth for Gujarat. 

Above all he is promoted by India’s leading industrial dynasties (Tatas, Birlas, Ambanis, Mittals and Adanis 

among them), and the media outlets they control, as the only one capable of delivering on all these fronts 

and hence the best future Prime Minister of India. 

This is an utterly imbalanced view of the impact of 13 years of Modi’s reign in Gujarat. We shall show that: 

1. On some key welfare indicators, where India is near the bottom of world league tables, Gujarat is not 

even the best in India and sometimes below the all-India level. 

2. On many other key indicators of welfare Gujarat ranks well below other states of India. 

3. There are serious corruption charges against Modi’s Government evinced by: 

(a) The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) 

(b) The Gujarat High Court 

(c) Corruption cases against serving ministers 

4 Gujarat under Modi has outperformed other states of India in the following: 

(a) GDP growth and some related indicators 

(b) Mob violence against minorities 

(c) The number of ministers and senior police officers jailed for killing innocent Muslims 

(d) Being home to the most polluted industrial area in India 

We now elaborate on these four points. 

1. Gujarat near the bottom where India is also near the bottom 

Based on the World Development Indicators (available from data.worldbank.org) and the Census of India, 

Nobel prize-winning economist Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze have provided comprehensive statistical evidence 

about development in India in their recent book An Uncertain Glory – India and its Contradictions. 

They compare India with 7 other South East Asian countries (Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, China, South 

Korea, Indonesia and Thailand) and also the 21 states of India with each other. 

Table 1, extracted from their work, shows some key welfare indicators where India is known to be at the 

bottom of world comparisons. Has Modi performed any miracle cures on these counts? On the contrary, the 

data suggests that the gender imbalance is worse in Gujarat than the all-India average (and also worse than 

1 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-bk-birla-joins-modi-for-pm-chorus-1302005 

2 http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/narendra-modi-a-king-among-kings-says-anil-ambani-at-vibrant-gujarat-summit-316076 


41

China). Only four out of 21 Indian states perform worse than Gujarat in this regard. On a number of other 

counts – female literacy rate, infant mortality rate and ‘multi-dimensional poverty’ (a robust new measure of 

poverty levels) there are between 7 and 10 states of India doing better. 

Not the rosy picture, then, suggested by the hype surrounding Modi’s record! 

Table 1 Gujarat’s poor performance where India is at the bottom of league tables 3 

Indicators 

Gujarat Gujarat rank All-India India’s rank Remarks 

figure out of 21 

states 

average out of 8 

countries 

Females per 

1000 males (2011) 

918 16th 937 7th China 926 

Kerala 1,084 

Female literacy rate 

(2011) 

70.7 9th 65.5 6th Kerala best 

at 92% 

Infant mortality per 

1000 live births (2011) 

41 Joint 11th 44 7th Kerala best 

at 12 

% ‘multi-dimensionally’ 

Poor (2005-06) 

41 8th 53.7 7th Kerala best 

at 12.7 

2. Gujarat near the bottom again 

Table 2 gives a list of key welfare indicators where Gujarat compares very unfavourably with other states of 

India. In all the indicators below, Gujarat’s performance is also below the national average. In 2005-06, after 6 

years of Modi’s rule, the percentage of households with toilet facilities was only 43.5, well below the shameful 

all-india figure of 49.3%. Again in 2005-06, 16 states of India performed better in terms of the percentage 

of undernourished children below age 5 and 14 states did better in terms of the percentage of women 

with anaemia. When asked about this Modi blamed body-image issues among girls! 4 

The position of women under Modi’s rule is abysmal. While we saw above that in 2011 the overall gender 

imbalance in Gujarat was worse than the all-India levels or even China, the reality on the ground is far worse 

than that because there were only 886 girls per 1000 boys under the age of 6. 

3 Source: Dreze and Sen, An Uncertain Glory: India and its Contradictions 

4 http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/narendra-modi-under-fire-for-attributing-malnutrition-in-gujarat-to-beauty-conscious-young-girls-260834 


Indicators 

% Undernourished children 

(weight for age) below age 5 (2005-06) 

Girls per 1000 boys 

0 to 6 years (2011) 

% of households with 

toilet facilities (2005-06) 

% women aged 15-49 

with moderate or severe anaemia 

(2005-06) 

Table 2 Gujarat’s poor performance on other key measures 5 

Gujarat 

figure 

Gujarat’s 

rank 

Out of 21 

states 

All-India 

average 

Remarks 

44.6 17th 42.5 Modi blames dieting 

886 15th 914 Worse than 

all-India average 

43.5 12th 49.3 Worse than 

all-India average 

19.1 18th 16.8 Modi blames dieting 

3. Corruption in Gujarat 

(a) 2012 CAG report finds massive corruption in Gujarat 

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India is a statutory body independent of the government 

or any other state agency. 6 In its 2012 report on Gujarat, CAG recognised some achievements of the Gujarat 

government, such as the high revenue and profits made by Gujarat public sector units. However, it also found a 

Rs 16,000 crore (Rs. 160 billion = £1.5 billion) hole in the state’s finances due to what can only be described as 

corrupt practices. The CAG report provides a long list of hand-outs to favoured industrial houses. These take 

the form of allocating projects without a proper bidding process, selling off public land and electricity at prices 

far below market value, allowing illegal permits and exemptions etc. Here are some typical examples. 7 

• The Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC) purchased gas at spot prices but sold it at a lower 

price to Adani Energy, resulting in additional undue benefit of Rs. 70.54 crore (Rs. 705 million = £7.05 

million). 

• Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries was allowed to install a platform in the Krishna-Godavari (KG) 

Block of GSPC without formal permission, making GPSC responsible for the structure for life. 

• Due to bids for KG block being submitted without proper assessment of technical and financial issues, 

the actual drilling cost incurred was $1.3 billion (£784 million), i.e. over 12 times higher than the 

original estimated exploration cost of $102.2 million (£61.5 million). 

• CAG found GSPC subsidiary Gujarat State Petronet Limited to have passed on undue benefits of Rs 

12.02 crore (Rs. 120 million = £1.2 million) to Essar Steel by waiving capacity charges contrary to the 

provisions of the gas transmission agreement. 

5 Source: Dreze and Sen, An Uncertain Glory. 

6 For instance, among its noteworthy exposes is the so-called Coalgate, a political scandal concerning the Indian government’s allocation of the nation’s 

coal deposits to public sector entities and private companies by the current Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. 

7 CAG report available at http://saiindia.gov.in/english/home/Our_Products/Audit_Report/Government_Wise/state_audit/recent_reports/Gujarat/2011/ 

Commercial/Commercial.html 


43

The biggest story of corruption is Modi government’s deal with Tata Motors. 

8 It shows that Gujarat government agreed to a loan of Rs. 9,500 crores 

(Rs. 95 billion = £950 million) to Tata Motors at an interest rate of 0.1%. 

Tata’s investment in the plant in Gujarat is only Rs. 2,000 crores (Rs. 20 billion 

= £200 million). 

Modi with business tycoon, Mukesh Ambani 

by NarendraModiofficial 

Once again these are not the only examples of corrupt practices favouring 

the big industrial dynasties of India. Is it any wonder that all the major 

industrial houses are plumping for Modi as the next Prime Minister or that 

Modi flies around in the private jet planes of Tata or Ambani or Adani? 

‘Gujarat is by and large 

a vegetarian state. And 

secondly, Gujarat is also a 

middle-class state. 

The middle-class is more 

beauty conscious than 

health conscious – that is 

a challenge. If a mother 

tells her daughter to have 

milk, they’ll have a fight. 

She’ll tell her mother, “I 

won’t drink milk. I’ll get 

fat.”’ 

Narendra Modi 

when asked about persistent 

malnutrition in Gujarat, 

August 2012 

(b) The Gujarat High Court’s verdicts on illegal practices of Gujarat 

government 

The following examples of ministerial decisions of the Gujarat government 

that were overruled by the Gujarat High Court are in no way unique 

to Gujarat. Similar things happen all over India and did happen under the 

previous Congress government in Gujarat. What the examples illustrate is 

the fact that the claim of Modi running a non-corrupt, squeaky clean administration 

is a lie. 

• Allotment of fishing rights in reservoirs of various dams without 

Auction 

In the year 2008, the Agriculture and Fisheries Minister Purushottam Solanki 

decided to give fishing rights at the 38 dams in Gujarat, without auction, 

to groups and individuals that he favoured. The loss to the Gujarat exchequer 

was estimated at Rs. 400 crore (Rs. 4 billion = £40 million). However, 

Modi did not see it fit to remove Mr. Solanki from his cabinet. 9 

• Allowing the Adani Group to operate without environmental 

clearance 

In January 2014 the Gujarat High Court ordered the immediate shutdown 

of all activities of 12 units of the Adani Port Special Economic Zone (AP- 

SEZ) at Mundra as the Adanis had not obtained environmental clearance 

under the Environment Impact Assessment Notification 2006. 

8 The details of this deal were leaked in 2008. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/modis-offer-for-nano-rs- 

9570-cr-soft-loan/77974-7.html 

9 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-cbi-probe-sought-in-rs400-crore-fisheries-scam-ingujarat-1786107 


The High Court heard a Public Interest suit filed by the farmers 

of the Navinal village and rejected the Adani Group’s contention 

that clearance should be deemed to have been received. It 

observed that APSEZ had blatantly violated the environmental 

norms. 10 

c) Corruption cases against ministers 

• Dinu Solanki, a BJP MP close to Modi’s right hand man 

Amit Shah, was charged by the Central Bureau of Investigation 

in Dec. 2013 for the murder of Right to Information activist 

Amit Jethwa who had filed a Public Interest Litigation case 

against Solanki for illegal mining. 11 

• Gujarat Water Resources Minister Babu Bokhiria was 

sentenced in June 2013 to 3 years’ imprisonment for illegal mining 

of lime stone in 2006. Modi made him a minister while the 

case was ongoing. 12 

Gujarat is not unique in this respect. Criminals enter politics all 

over India and most parties have their share of them. However, 

these examples show clearly that the Modi-run government is 

no different. 

4. Where Gujarat Excels 

‘He [Modi] could have 

first of all been more 

secular and he could 

have made the minority 

community feel more 

secure… I don’t think 

the record is very good. I 

think I don’t have to be a 

member of the minority 

in order to feel insecure 

… We Indians don’t want 

a situation where the 

minority feel insecure and 

could legitimately think 

that there was an organised 

violence against them 

in 2002. I think that is a 

terrible record and I don’t 

think Indian prime minister 

as an Indian citizen … 

Of who has that kind of 

record. No, I do not.’ 

(a) 

cators 

Excellent record in GDP growth and some related indi 

Amartya Sen, 

Nobel Prize Winner for 

Economics, July 2013 

Sen and Dreze’s book does contain evidence of areas where 

Gujarat’s has performed well under Modi’s rule. Table 3 lists the 

most important ones. 

10 http://www.downtoearth.org.in/content/gujarat-high-court-orders-shut-down-12-manufacturing-units-mundra-sez 

11 http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/rti-activist-amit-jethwa-murder-case-bjp-leaderdinu-solanki-named-in-cbi-chargesheet-461541 

12 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-15/india/39992651_1_illegalmining-case-gujarat-minister-porbandar 


45

The figure cited most often by promoters of Modi is the average growth rate of GDP from 2001-11 (the 

period of his chief ministership of Gujarat). At 8.2% it is the highest among all 21 states. They consider it 

positive proof of his administrative capability and grand vision. 

However, 

• It is unclear how much of this is due to Modi’s great administrative skills. For instance, Gujarat had 

one of the highest rates of growth even in the years before his administration. 13 

• Gujarat’s entrepreneurial class of Baniyas, Patels and Bohras have a long history of prosperous 

commerce. 

• Other states have done at least as well, if not better. Rates of growth in Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu 

at 7.5% are not far behind and, though not as large a state, Himachal Pradesh has had a better growth 

rate at 10%. But no one gives credit to their chief ministers. In fact Tamil Nadu does better in terms 

of several socio-economic indicators and Kerala, with 7% GDP growth over this period, is the best 

on most social indicators. 

• In recent times, with a growth rate of close to 15 per cent, historically poor Bihar has also 

outstripped Gujarat. Nigeria has a high growth rate but no one in their right mind would call Nigeria 

a model of good administration. 

• Can good administration atone for Modi’s record on dealing with minorities? Didn’t Mussolini make 

the trains run on time? 

As is evident from Dreze and Sen’s data, there are other areas in which Gujarat is doing well. It has the highest 

percentage of government schools with electricity; there are only five states with a higher percentage of 

households with electricity; it is no. 2 on both the murder rate and the percentage of households owning 

two-wheelers. 

13 http://www.rediff.com/business/column/modis-myths-about-gujarats-growth-and-other-hype-column/20120711.htm 


Indicator 

Growth rate of 

State GDP (2001-11) 

% of govt schools 

with electricity (2009- 

10) 

% of households with 

electricity (2005-06) 

Murder rate 

Per 100,000 (2010) 

% of households 

Owning 2 wheelers 

Table 3 where Gujarat excels 14 

Gujarat figure Gujarat’s rank 

Out of 21 

states 

All-India 

figure 

Remarks 

8.2% 2st 6% Most favourable 

figure for Modi 

94 1st 31.4 

89.3 6th 67.9 Joint 6th 

with Karnataka 

1.7 2nd 2.8 Jointly with two other 

states. 

Only Kerala better at 1.1 

34.1 2nd 21 Only Punjab better 

at 47.5 

While there are caveats to the success story of Gujarat outlined in table 3, there are things achieved under 

the Modi government that indisputably surpass all other states. We take these up next. 

(b) Gujarat leads in unleashing murder and repression on minorities 

Modi has been in power in Gujarat since 2001. From 2001 to date no other state of India even comes close 

to matching Gujarat’s record of mob violence against Muslims in 2002. Within three days of the burning 

of a train coach at Godhra station (See ‘Narendra Modi’s Culpability in the Gujarat Genocide: A Factsheet’) 

more than 2,000 people, largely Muslim, were killed. Many, such as the three British Muslims were burnt 

alive. Muslim women were assaulted, gang raped and tortured (See ‘Violence and Control: Modi, the Sangh 

Parivar and Women’). More than 200,000 Muslims were made homeless and many still languish in makeshift 

accommodation without any compensation or even recognition of their existence. 

India has seen many bloody communal riots, some even bloodier. But not since 2001. What Gujarat 

achieved under Modi’s rule has not been surpassed. 

(c) 

Ministers and senior police officers imprisoned for murder of innocent Muslims 

• Ministers 

Dr. Maya Kodnani, appointed Minister for Chid Development by Modi in 2007, was convicted of 

orchestrating the massacre of 95 people during the Naroda Gam and Naroda Patia riots 

that followed the Godhra train burning in February 2002. She was sentenced to 28 years in prison. 

14 Dreze and Sen, An Uncertain Glory 


47

Amit Shah, right hand man of Modi and Minister of State for Home Affairs, was arrested 

on charges of having ordered a series of “encounter” killings by the State Police. He is 

currently out on bail. 15 Most recently, he was appointed by Narendra Modi to coordinate 

the BJP’s election machine in the electorally critical state of Uttar Pradesh. 16 

• Senior police officers 

Twenty two alleged terrorists were killed by the Gujarat Police in over seven “encounters” 

between 2003 and 2007. All of them were accused of conspiring to kill Gujarat Chief Minister 

Narendra Modi and senior VHP leaders. 

In the years of investigations that have followed, it has become clear that some of these were, 

in fact, fake encounters conducted by senior Gujarat state police and officers of the Indian 

Police Service (IPS). A staggering six IPS officers and 13 Gujarat state police officers are in 

jail. D G. Vanzara, the most senior of these police officers, resigned from the police service 

while in jail in September 2013 and accused Amit Shah and Narendra Modi of having given 

the orders to eliminate four people. In Vanzara’s words (Times of India, 3 Sept. 2013): 

“CBI had arrested me and my officers holding us responsible for carrying out alleged fake 

encounters. If that is true, [the CBI] have to arrest the policy formulators also, as we, being 

field officers, have simply implemented the conscious policy of this government. ... I am of 

the firm opinion that the place of this government, instead of being in Gandhinagar, should 

either be in Taloja Central Prison at Navi Mumbai or in Sabarmati Central Prison at 

Ahmedabad.” 

(d) 

Vapi in Gujarat has been designated the most polluted place in India 

“Gujarat has given priority to protect the environment along with development in industrial sector and 

has done well to protect the environment,” Modi claimed while addressing a gathering in August 2013. 

17 

However, just three years earlier, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) had declared Gujarat 

the most polluted State in the country. 18 The conclusion was based on the increasing levels of 

pollution and toxic wastes. So what is the reality of pollution in Gujarat? Has Modi managed to clean 

up Gujarat since 2010? 

15 http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/bjp-wilts-promotes-murder-tainted-amit-shah-as-narendra-modi-flexes-muscles/1095600/ 

16 http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-01-10/news/46066570_1_amit-shah-rss-lord-ram 

17 India Today, August 2, 2013 http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/modi-says-gujarat-committed-to-protect-environment-alongwith-industrialdevelopment/1/297742.html 

18 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-gujarat-declared-most-polluted-state-in-the-country-1361979 


Not if we follow CPCB’s later findings. In 2012 it released its new Comprehensive Environmental 

Pollution Index (CEPI) score which revealed that Vapi, in Southern Gujarat, was the most critically 

polluted place in the country, having moved up from second rank in its 2009 list. 19 This has necessitated 

a ban, by the central government’s Ministry of Environment and Forests, on new projects 

or expansion of existing ones in Vapi imposed. 20 It would appear, however, that no action has been 

taken by the Gujarat administration. Indeed, in the effort to be industry-friendly, issues relating to the 

environment are routinely neglected in the state, particularly along the 400 km industrial corridor in 

Gujarat between Vapi and Vatwa. 21 It seems that this neglect of the environment is an integral part of 

the so-called Gujarat model. 

Considered as a whole, a more accurate assessment of Modi’s record as administrator would be that 

he has preserved Gujarat’s historical lead on a number of counts while failing to improve Gujarat’s 

low status in health, education and gender inequality. On other fronts too – law and order and corruption-free 

government – Modi’s administrative capabilities don’t seem to have been transformative 

in any way. With respect to civil liberties, particularly those of minorities, his legacy to governance in 

Gujarat is extremely regressive. Stripped of public relations hyperbole, then, Modi’s administration has 

shown little by way of imaginative or innovative solutions to Gujarat’s real and persistent problems. 

19 “Critically polluted areas are those where air, water and land pollution exceed the assimilative capacity of the environment, affecting human 

health.” http://www.downtoearth.org.in/content/vapi-tops-list-critically-polluted-areass 

20 http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-20/ahmedabad/42251665_1_vapi-pollution-control-board-moef 

21 http://www.rainwaterharvesting.org/crisis/Industrial-pollution.htm 


49

seven 

Hindutva, RSS and the Sangh Parivar 

Prof. Chetan Bhatt, Director, Centre for the Study of Human Rights, 

London School of Economics 

Summary 

• Hindutva is the term used to describe a modern, exclusionary political idea of 

Hindu supremacism that was directly inspired by Fascism and Nazism. It actively strives 

to make India a Hindu nation-state (Hindurashtra) in which all non-Hindus would be 

second-class citizens. 

• The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is an organisation committed to the principles 

of Hindutva and dedicated to the creation of a Hindurashtra. It is exclusively male, 

rigidly hierarchical and cultivates militaristic practices among its members. 

• The RSS is organised through cells (shakhas) that are aimed at recruiting young 

children who are instructed in RSS ideology and who subsequently move up the ranks of 

the organisation into positions of greater responsibility. 

• In posing as a cultural organisation, the RSS seeks to engage people at personal 

and familial levels. It has a long-term perspective on achieving its stated aims. 

• The RSS is the parent body of a wider network of organisations, called the Sangh 

Parivar, that take up other kinds of tasks. The RSS remains the core source of ideological 

guidance and personnel for all of them. 

• The major constituents of the Sangh Parivar include the Bharatiya Janata Party 

(BJP), the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the Bajrang Dal and the Rashtra Sevika Samiti. 

BJP represents the political wing of the Sangh Parivar, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) 

is its religious wing and has international arms, the Bajrang Dal is a youth organisation 

that is often involved in extremely violent action and the Rashtra Sevika Samiti is a Hindu 

supremacist women’s organisation. 


What is Hindutva? 

Hindutva is an ideology invented by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in a pamphlet written in English and 

published in 1923, Hindutva – who is a Hindu? 1 Prior to this, Savarkar had been involved in the terrorist 

wing of the anti-colonial movement and imprisoned by the British. After 1937, Savarkar became 

president of an organization called the Hindu Mahasabha (Great Hindu Assembly) and remained 

a committed political opponent of Mohandas K. Gandhi. Hindu nationalists, partly inspired by the 

ideology of Hindutva, made six attempts on Gandhi’s life. Gandhi’s murderer Nathuram Godse was 

Savarkar’s ‘lieutenant’, and close associate. He was also a full-time worker (pracharak) for the Rashtriya 

Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Savarkar himself stood trial for Gandhi’s murder as a co-conspirator but 

was acquitted. 

Savarkar’s Hindutva is based on the political view that India must be an exclusively Hindu nationstate 

(Hindurashtra) in which all citizens must demonstrate obedience and allegiance to Hindutva. For 

Savarkar, Hindutva was an identity based on ‘race’ and ‘blood’ (which he called ‘the most important 

ingredient’ of Hindutva), a sanskrit-based, upper-caste idea of culture, and a sacred territory. A Hindu, 

according to him, was someone who shared the blood of ‘Vedic-Aryan’ ancestors, embraced only 

‘sanskritik’ culture and who viewed India as their fatherland and ‘holyland’. Savarkar was influenced by 

Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and made many statements in their support. He compared Muslims 

in India to Jews in Germany, supported Hitler’s military invasion and occupation of Czechoslovakia 

and other sovereign states, and attacked Nehru for criticising Nazism and Fascism. As late as 1961, 

Savarkar said that India would be better off with a dictator like Hitler instead of being a democracy. 

What is the RSS? 

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS, lit. National Volunteers’ Corps) was formed in 1925-1926 by 

Keshav Baliram Hedgewar in Nagpur, Maharashtra in Western India. Influenced by Savarkar’s ideas, 

it is an exclusively male organization devoted to the political ideology of Hindutva and represents an 

Indian version of fascism. Hedgewar formed RSS as an organization of young boys and men that was 

based on military drills, physical exercise, weapons training, propagation of the ideology of Hindutva 

and anti-minority hatred. Hedgewar, together with another key founder of the RSS, Balkrishna 

Shivram Moonje, was also influenced by Fascism and Nazism. 

British reports had highlighted that from 1927, B. S. Moonje, was inspired to model the RSS on Fascist 

and Nazi movements. In 1931, Moonje visited Fascist Italy where he met with and was extremely 

impressed by Mussolini. 

1 Savarkar, V. D., Hindutva, Bombay: Veer Savarkar Prakashan, 1989. 


51

Of the Fascist Balilla movement, which organized military training and 

fascist indoctrination of young boys, Moonje said: 

RSS supreme leader Mohan Bhagwat at a shakha 

by Vishal Dutta 

‘German race pride has 

now become the topic 

of the day. To keep up 

the purity of the Race 

and its culture, Germany 

shocked the world by 

purging the country of 

the Semitic 

Races – the Jews. Race 

pride at its highest has 

been manifested here. 

Germany has also shown 

how well-night impossible 

it is for Races and cultures, 

having differences 

going to the root, to be 

assimilated into 

one united whole, a good 

lesson for us in 

Hindusthan to learn and 

profit by. ‘ 

M.S. Golwalkar, 

‘We or Our Nationhood 

Defined’. p. 87-88. 

Mussolini saw the essential weakness of his country and conceived 

the idea of the Balilla organization…India and particularly 

Hindu India need some such institution for the military regeneration 

of the Hindus…Our institution, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak 

Sangh of Nagpur under Dr Hedgewar is of this kind, though 

quite independently conceived. I shall spend the rest of my life 

developing and extending this institution of Dr Hedgewar all 

throughout Maharashtra and other provinces. 2 

The Italy visit inspired Moonje to promote these ideas among Hindus in 

Maharashtra and begin to organize Hindu youth movements along the 

lines of this fascist model. 3 In 1934, the RSS’s first sarsangchalak (supreme 

leader), Hedgewar presided over a meeting in Nagpur aimed at 

propagating Mussolini’s fascist thought in India. Moonje is today called 

Dharamveer (lit. hero in the religious struggle) by the RSS. He said that 

India not only needed a dictator like Hitler but that a scheme to bring 

such a dictator had to be urgently carried out. 

…unless we have our own swaraj with a Hindu as a dictator like 

Shivaji of old or Mussolini or Hitler of present day Italy and Germany…But 

this does not mean that we have to sit with folded 

hands until some such dictator arises in India. We should formulate 

a scientific scheme and carry on propaganda for it. 4 

RSS’s second leader, Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar, also supported Nazi 

Germany and Fascist Italy. In his key book We, or our nationhood defined, 

published in 1939, he was openly supportive of the anti-Semitic 

policies of Nazi Germany towards German-Jews and Hitler’s violent 

invasion of other sovereign territories. 5 

2 Moonje quoted in M. Casolari, ‘Hindutva’s foreign tie-up in the 1930s: archival evidence’, Economic 

& Political Weekly, 22 January 2000, page 220. 

3 Casolari ibid. 

4 Moonje quoted in Casolari, ibid. 

5 Golwalkar, M.S., We, or Our Nationhood Defined, Nagpur: Bharat Publications, [1939] 1944. 


He lauded Fascist Italy and said these were models which India 

could learn and profit by. 

German race pride has now become the topic of the day. 

To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany 

shocked the world by her purging the country of 

the semitic Races - the Jews. Race pride at its highest has 

been manifested here. Germany has shown how well nigh 

impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences 

going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, 

a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by. 6 

For him, in India there must exist only the ‘Hindu nation’ and 

those who fail to abandon their ‘racial, religious and cultural differences’ 

and fail to ‘completely merge themselves in the National 

Race’ would only be foreigners. 7 For Golwalkar, no minority was 

deserving of any ‘right whatsoever’ or ‘any obligations from the 

National race’. Minorities must ‘cultivate a positive attitude of love 

and devotion’ towards the Hindu Nation and could stay in India if 

they remained ‘wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming 

nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment 

- not even citizen’s rights. 8 Minorities were to either give up their 

beliefs or live at ‘the sweet will of the majority’. 

‘So long as the Christians 

here indulge in such 

[proselytizing] 

activities and consider 

themselves as agents of 

the international 

movement for the spread 

of Christianity, and 

refuse to offer their first 

loyalty to the land of their 

birth and behave as true 

children of the 

heritage and culture of 

their ancestors, they will 

remain here as hostiles 

and will have to be 

treated as such.’ 

M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of 

Thoughts, Part 2, Ch. 16 

These ideas continue to be core beliefs of the RSS which stated 

in 2002 that the safety of Muslims in India lies in ‘the goodwill of 

the majority’. 9 Golwalkar, together with Hedgewar, is venerated by 

the RSS and its UK branches and his birth centenary in 2006 was 

celebrated lavishly by the RSS, including in the UK (see ‘Hindutva 

Fascism in the UK’). 

The RSS is not a democratic organization and is based on the 

idea of one ‘Supreme Leader’ (sarsangchalak), obedience to the 

one Supreme Leader (ek chalak anuvartitva) and of the Supreme 

6 Madhav Golwalkar, We, or our nationhood defined, Bharat Publications, Nagpur, [1939] 

1944, page 37. 

7 Golwalkar, ibid, pages 45-6. 

8 Golwalkar, ibid, pages 48-9. 

9 http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2002-03-28/news/27352782_1_bangaloreresolution-rss-leader-mr-vaidya 


53

Leader as ‘the principle one who is to be venerated’ (parampoojaniya). RSS members are called ‘swayamsevaks’ 

(lit. volunteers) working in the service of the Hindu Nation. The Indian RSS claims not 

to keep membership records but it has an estimated 2.5 – 4 million members and 40,000 regular cells 

(shakhas). It claims not to keep any bank accounts and it does not have to pay income tax. It is notified 

under Indian law as an organization of a political nature and so cannot legally receive foreign 

funds in its own name. 

The RSS’s primary goal is to hierarchically organize and strengthen Hindus and create an entirely 

new society based on its ideology of militarism, masculinity and hatred of others. Taking forward 

Savarkar’s ideas, this new society is imagined as a powerful and exclusive Hindurashtra (Hindu nationstate). 

The shakha is the basic unit of organisation. Here members undertake physical exercise and 

military drills, ideological discussions and a range of rituals, of which the most important are devotion 

to its saffron flag and its first two sarsangchalaks, Hedgewar and Golwalkar. Shakhas are organized 

by age groups: from very young children to youths, adults, and the elderly. Among the crucial aims of 

the shakha (whether run by the RSS in India or HSS in UK) is to recruit children at a very young age, 

inculcate RSS ideology in them, bring them closer to the RSS and its organizations and eventually lead 

them to more activist and senior positions. In the UK, shakhas are often presented to parents, teachers 

and others as simply educational activities for young children, including classes on Hinduism and 

Gujarati language. 

Understanding How the RSS Works 

The Indian RSS 

• is an extremely tightly-structured and secretive organization with a very strong hierarchy, rigid 

rules for its members and officers, its own decision-making bodies and structures, its own festivals, 

hymns, songs, rituals, uniform and daily activities in shakhas. 

• has always had the overriding goal of a totally organized, ordered and muscular ‘Hindu society’ 

that would turn India into a Hindu nation-state (Hindurashtra). RSS statements about pseudosecularism, 

minority appeasement and ‘Hindu rights’ are secondary to this principal aim: to create 

a Hindurashtra. 

• uses methods for organizing, ‘strengthening’ and consolidating Hindus called sangathan. This 

is also central to how RSS organizations outside India carry out their work. The aim of sangathan 

is to bring other Hindus closer to the RSS ideal of Hindurashtra. 

• uses a very carefully created language that substitutes its narrow ideology for Hinduism, Indian 

nationalism, patriotism, social service, welfare, charity and religion. This includes the deception 

that the RSS is a cultural and not a political organization. 

• works strategically and patiently, on a long-term basis and at very deep, personal, individual 

and familial levels. 


• is both an independent entity and works through affiliated fronts. These fronts usually have a 

more specific scope of activity, or are addressed to particular groups: political, religious, cultural, 

welfare, educational, women, students, labour, tribal, peasants and youth. These often have different 

national, regional and local names and help establish RSS presence across a range of fields in 

Indian civil and political society. Often, the RSS connection is not immediately visible, but all of 

them are started, coordinated or run by RSS full-time propagators or volunteers (pracharaks), usually 

deputised by the RSS for such work. 

• is the base or foundational organization for the whole Sangh Parivar. The key to understanding 

the activities of Sangh Parivar organizations, whether in India or elsewhere, is the aims, goals and 

ideology of the RSS. 

The Sangh Parivar 

The RSS has created a range of affiliated organizations in India called the ‘Sangh Parivar’ or the RSS 

‘family’. The most important of these organizations are: 

Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP – World Hindu Council), 

The VHP was formed in 1964 by RSS activists and Golwalkar. The VHP has grown tremendously 

since the 1980s and has both a national (Indian) and an international structure. It also has a youth 

wing, the extremely violent Bajrang Dal, a women’s wing (the Durga Vahini), associated organizations 

such as the Hindu Jagran Manch (Forum for Hindu Awakening), and a variety of other service, 

religious and social sections. The RSS sarsangchalak is also a member of the VHP’s ‘Council of the 

Learned’ and its executive body. 

The VHP has been at the absolute forefront of mass violent Hindutva movements, such as the ‘Ramjanmabhoomi’ 

(the supposed birthplace of Ram) movement to destroy the sixteenth-century Babri 

mosque at Ayodhya and build a Ram temple in its place; the campaign for ‘the liberation of Krishnajanmasthan’ 

(the alleged birth place of Krishna) at Mathura, in which the VHP wishes to destroy 

mosques near a Krishna temple; the Kashi Vishwanath campaign, Varanasi, in which the VHP wants 

mosque buildings near a Shiva shrine to be removed; and the Saraswati Bhojshala campaign, Dhar, 

in which the VHP wants shrines and mosques used for a joint Hindu-Muslim tradition of worship 

at a Saraswati temple to be destroyed. Of the Gujarat carnage, the VHP said that it was a ‘successful 

experiment which will be repeated all over the country’. 10 The VHP and its associated organization the 

Hindu Jagran Manch, and the extremely violent VHP youth wing, the Bajrang Dal took the lead in the 

systematic attack on Christian communities in Gujarat from 1997, which reached a peak of brutality in 

1998-1999. 

10 http://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/india-hate-speeches-violence-gujarat-must-be-stopped 


55

Bajrang Dal (Hanuman’s Army) 

Bajrang Dal is the extremely violent and fanatical youth wing of the VHP. It works through terror and 

intimidation of minorities and secular opponents. It has been consistently involved and implicated 

in acts of violence, terror and murder, including many of the killings during the Gujarat violence in 

2002. 

Bharatiya Janata Party 

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is a Hindu nationalist political party which is currently the main opposition 

party and heads the National Democratic Alliance coalition. Shortly after coming to power in 

1998, the NDA government detonated nuclear devices in the Pokharan desert close to the Pakistani 

border, resulting in a similar response from Pakistan. The BJP is committed to the ideology of Hindutva, 

cultural nationalism (sanskritik rashtriyavad) and ‘Integral Humanism’ (a form of Hindutva 

developed by an RSS full-time organizer called Deendayal Upadhyaya in the mid-1960s). Its slogan is 

‘One Nation, One People, One Culture’ in which all citizens must consider the Hindu nation sacred. 

Rashtra Sevika Samiti 

Rashtra Sevika Samiti is a women’s organization created in 1936 as the first RSS affiliate. It is committed 

to the same Hindutva ideology as the RSS, and strongly opposes feminism and secular projects for 

women’s emancipation. It adopts the patriarchal RSS ideology of matruvat paradareshu, which essentially 

means that women have two roles – as mother or wife. The Hindutva women’s movement has 

also been violent and encouraged violence against minority communities, especially through the hate 

speech of Sadhvi Rithambara (VHP) and Uma Bharati (BJP, VHP). The Sevikas also have a shakha 

structure, organizational hierarchy, songs, festivals and uniforms, paralleling those of the RSS. 

Other major organizations affiliated to the RSS include: 

Sewa Bharati – the RSS service affiliate formed in 1989. 

Sewa International – the international fundraising wing for RSS service projects. 

Bharatiya Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram (VKA) – the RSS affiliate working among adivasi (‘tribal’) populations. 

Vidya Bharati Akhil Bharatiya Shiksha Sansthan – the RSS educational affiliate formed in 1976. 

Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) – the RSS student affiliate formed in 1948 to combat leftwing 

influences among students and academics in the university and college sector. 

Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh – the RSS labour affiliate formed in 1955 to defeat ‘communist influences’ 

in industry. 


The RSS, then, presides over a formidably diverse set of affiliates. These have a variety of arenas of 

intervention – from the cultural and religious to the overtly political – and a range of modes of activity 

– from the legal-electoral to the violent. All, however, are unified by the long-term vision of the 

RSS: to redefine belonging and nationality in India in terms of the Hindu-supremacist ideology of 

Hindutva. 

SOURCES 

Andersen W. K. and Damle S., The Brotherhood in Saffron: the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and 

Hindu revivalism, Boulder CO: Westview Press, 1987. 

Bhatt, C., Hindu nationalism: origins, ideologies and modern myths, Oxford: Berg, 2001. 

Golwalkar, M. S., Bunch of Thoughts, Jagrana Prakashana, Bangalore, 1966. 

Jaffrelot, C., The Hindu nationalist movement and Indian politics, London: Hurst, 1996. 

Kanungo, P., RSS’s Tryst With Politics: From Hedgewar to Sudarshan, Delhi: Manohar, 2002. 

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, RSS: Spearheading National Renaissance, Karnataka: Rashtriya Swayamsevak 

Sangh, 1980. 

Sarkar, S., ‘The Fascism of the Sangh Parivar’, Economic and Political Weekly, 28 (5), January 30, 

1993, 163-167. 

Seshadri, H. V. ed., RSS: A Vision in Action, Bangalore: Jagarana Prokashana, 1988. 


57

eight 

Hindutva Fascism in the UK 

Prof. Chetan Bhatt, Director, Centre for the Study of Human Rights 

Summary 

• The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has been established and active in the UK since 1966 

under the name Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS). The HSS shares the same ideology as the RSS in 

India, and models its organisational structure and family of affiliated organisations in the UK on the 

Indian parent organisation. 

• The primary aim of HSS UK activities is to create physical and ideological training cells (shakhas) 

and to organize and strengthen Hindus (sangathan) under RSS ideology. 

• HSS UK shakhas are run in almost exactly the same way as RSS shakhas. They include prayers, 

hymns and slogans, devotion to the RSS saffron flag, adulation of K. B. Hedgewar and M. S. Golwalkar 

(the first two RSS supreme leaders), physical exercises, sports, martial arts, and ideological 

indoctrination sessions 

• Direct links between the HSS and RSS are also well attested. Since the mid-1990s, heads of the 

RSS in India have come to UK regularly to provide guidance and motivation to the HSS. 

• Like the RSS, HSS too presides over a ‘family’ of organisations that includes the National Hindu 

Students’ Forum, Vishwa Hindu Parishad International, Sewa International, Hindu Sevika Samiti and 

Overseas Friends of the BJP. 

• Raising funds for the activities of the RSS in India is a crucial part of the activities of the HSS 

and its affiliates. Often these fundraising drives are carried out in the wake of natural disasters in India. 

The majority of the funds are, however, inevitably used to further the ideas and goals of the RSS, 

in particular the establishment of RSS-organised schools and religious institutions. 

• Firms like Saffron Chase, formed by HSS activists, have actively worked to improve Narendra 

Modi’s image in UK. They have tried to shift attention away from his role in the riots in 2002 and to 

present him as simply a business-friendly administrator concerned with development. 

• Labour Friends of India in general and Barry Gardiner M.P. in particular have been advocating 

the cause of the BJP in India. In part, this has been a result of the work of HSS and the rest of its affiliates. 

Gardiner has had close and long-term ties with the HSS and its family. 


The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has been established and active in the UK since 1966 under the name 

of Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh (HSS). HSS shares the same ideology as the RSS in India, and models its organisational 

structure and family of UK affiliated organisations on the Indian parent organisation 1 . Together with 

the Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK (a branch of the violent, Hindu supremacist VHP in India), HSS UK maintains 

very close and extensive links with the Indian RSS and works under the latter’s direct guidance 2 . 

Just like the Indian RSS, HSS UK targets young Hindu boys and girls, incorporating them into cells called 

shakhas (lit. branches). Youngsters are taught to revere the RSS’s two ‘Supreme Leaders’ – both of whom were 

admirers and conscious emulators of Nazism and Fascism – and the RSS’s saffron flag (see ‘Hindutva, RSS 

and the Sangh Parivar’). To this very day, the HSS glorifies and celebrates the personality and work of the RSS’s 

second leader, Madhav Golwalkar, a strong advocate of Nazi-like ideas for India. The fundraising arms of 

the HSS, Sewa International (aka Sewa UK) and other ‘sewa’ activities of the National Hindu Students’ Forum 

(NHSF) are geared to raising funds from the British public and British students for RSS projects and aims in 

India. As is outlined below, the HSS, its activists and its affiliates in the UK, including the NHSF, have lobbied 

and advocated strongly for Narendra Modi at a number of political levels. HSS members and associates have 

been a dominant influence on the Labour Friends of India and are key supporters of the newly-formed All 

Party Parliamentary Group for British Hindus. 

Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh, UK 

The Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh UK (HSS UK) was initiated in 1966 and became a charitable trust from 1974 

(charity registration number 267309). Its headquarters in Leicester was called ‘Keshav Pratishthan’ (institute), 

‘Keshav’ being the first name of the founder of the Indian RSS. The inauguration of the new offices in April 

1995 was presided over by the then sarsangchalak (supreme leader) of the RSS, Rajendra Singh. The primary 

aim of HSS UK activities is to create physical and ideological training cells (shakhas) and to organize and 

strengthen Hindus (sangathan) under RSS ideology. HSS ideology is disseminated in its shakhas for very young 

children (balagokulam), teenagers and adults. 

In 2002, HSS reported 72 weekly shakhas in 38 UK cities which were attended by about 1500 individuals. HSS 

UK shakhas are run in almost exactly the same way as those of the RSS. This includes the prayers, hymns and 

slogans, devotion to the RSS saffron flag, adulation of K. B. Hedgewar and M. S. Golwalkar (the first two RSS 

sarsangchalaks), physical exercises, sports, martial arts, and ideological inculcation sessions. HSS UK and its 

affiliates celebrate the same six festivals (utsavs) as the Indian RSS. HSS UK also organizes annual intensive 

training camps for nominated members who are moving up the HSS hierarchy, national activist camps, as well as 

other related activities in Europe and India. 

1 Awaaz South Asia Watch, In bad faith? British charity and Hindu extremism, London: Awaaz South Asia Watch, 2004: 43 

2 Awaaz South Asia Watch, In bad faith?, pp. 46-49 


59

‘The persons assembling 

there [in the shakha] learn 

to obey a single command. 

Discipline enters 

their blood. More important 

than discipline of 

the body is the discipline 

of the mind. They learn 

to direct their individual 

emotions and impulses 

towards the great national 

cause.’ 

M.S. Golwalkar, Bunch of 

Thoughts, Part 4, Ch. 33 

HSS ideology is made explicit in its publications, in the material used in its 

shakhas and in the publications sold by the Hindu Sahitya Kendra (Hindu 

Literature Centre). These include writings by and about Golwalkar, 

Hedgewar, Savarkar, the RSS and writings on Aryanism and Hindutva. 

The Indian RSS is quite open about its links with HSS and VHP UK. The 

Indian RSS explicitly considers the work of the HSS UK, the Hindu Sevika 

Samiti UK, the VHP UK, the NHSF, the Overseas Friends of the BJP, 

the Kalyan Ashram Trust, Sewa International and Hindu Sahitya Kendra, 

among others, as part of the RSS’s Hindutva mission in the UK. These 

are not paper links but deep connections that work in both directions. The 

previous sarsangchalaks of the RSS, Rajendra Singh, K.S. Sudarshan and 

the current RSS leader Mohan Bhagwat, have been on tours to the UK 

at which they have addressed HSS UK members and given guidelines for 

HSS work in the UK. 3 The visit by Rajendra Singh to Europe from 13 

– 25 April 1995 was the first ever visit abroad by an RSS supreme leader. 

During this tour he spoke at meetings of the HSS and Sewa International, 

the NHSF, the VHP and the Hindu Sevika Samiti, among other Hindutva 

groups. This pattern of association between the HSS and its family here 

on the one hand and the RSS and its family in India on the other has continued 

and expanded greatly. 

RSS Supreme Leader Mohan Bhagwat visiting UK in September 2008 to 

launch a book celebrating the ideology of M.S. Golwalkar, the second RSS 

leader who espoused strongly Fascist and Nazi-like ideas. Sangh Sandesh 

Oct – Dec 2008, p. 4 

UK SANGH PARIVAR 

The HSS UK family (Sangh Parivar) makes up a closely-related set of 

Hindutva organizations operating in the UK. Their aims and ideology are 

also based on that of the RSS. 

National Hindu Students’ Forum 

While most Hindu students would not be aware of its RSS links, which 

are often kept well-hidden, the National Hindu Students’ Forum is an 

HSS affiliate operating amongst university students and modelled on the 

RSS’s Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad. NHSF has chapters in about 

3 Awaaz South Asia Watch 2004: 46; Sangh Sandesh Oct-Dec 2008: 4 


30 UK universities. Of late, NHSF has claimed to have no link to HSS UK. For example, in August 2003 

its Vice President said, ‘We have no direct link with them [HSS UK]. There is no religious or political affiliation; 

we are not funded or bonded to them, but there is a moral affiliation as with every other Hindu 

organization.’ 4 Similarly, in 2004, the NHSF General Secretary Shrien Dewani (currently facing charges in 

South African courts related to the brutal murder of his wife Anni Hindocha) also vociferously denied the 

HSS links, while in the same statement confirming that NHSF does raise funds for the HSS. 5 

In fact, NHSF was formed by the HSS and considered essential to spread RSS ideology among the next 

generation of UK Hindus. In its initial years NHSF shared the same address as the HSS UK, but changed 

its address following exposure of its RSS links in the early 2000s. Prior to this, their website stated that 

‘NHSF enjoys a close working relationship with HSS UK and benefits from the active involvement of the 

‘karyakartas’ (volunteers) within HSS. The spread of HSS throughout towns and cities in the United Kingdom 

means that the former is an integral part of the support network for NHSF.’ 6 NHSF maintains strong 

links with RSS/HSS organisations in a number of ways: 

• By fundraising for Sewa International (Sewa UK), Sewa Day and other HSS-organised 

projects. (See below for Sewa International’s role as fundraising arm of RSS/HSS). 

• Through promoting Narendra Modi and working to support him 

• Through individual links between HSS members and the NHSF 

• By promoting Hindutva ideology in its activities and publications 

Sewa International 

The primary purpose of Sewa International (aka Sewa UK) is to raise funds for RSS projects in India – 

mainly for organisations like Sewa Bharati, Vidya Bharati and the network of RSS-associated ‘one-teacher 

schools’ that go by several names and charitable fronts in the UK and US, including Ekal Vidyalaya and 

Saraswati Vidyalaya. Several other projects are associated with Sewa International, including Charity 

Through Adventure and Sewa Day, itself a charity in the UK established by HSS figures. 

The RSS in India is particularly active during humanitarian disasters and these are often seen as opportunities 

to expand the Sangh Parivar network within the affected areas, build RSS schools, generate one-teacher 

schools (especially among adivasi – so-called ‘tribal’ – groups), build religious institutions modelled on RSS 

ideology, focus on projects in adivasi communities to initiate them into Hindutva ideology. This RSS strategy 

in India is directly supported through fundraising by HSS-linked groups in the UK, Europe and North 

America. 

4 Aiden Jones, ‘Society fundamentalist links’, Warwick Boar, Summer, 2003, vol. 25, issue 21. 

5 http://www.nhsf.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=37:29-february-2004-awaaz-spread-lies&catid=241:national&Item 

id=219 

6 http://www.nhsf.org.uk/aboutus.htm (now removed but accessed and archived in 2004 and available), 


61

After extreme public concern in UK in the early 2000s about the fundraising by Sewa International/HSS 

UK for RSS projects in India, including for groups engaged in systematic violence and hatred against minorities 

in India, UK Hindutva groups have created front organisations that attempt to disguise RSS links. 

Similarly, groups like NHSF have changed their address and it is no longer the same as that of the HSS. 

However, NHSF, Sewa UK and other associated groups continue to be driven by a commitment to further 

RSS ideology and aims in their activities. 

The fundraising nexus between the HSS, Sewa UK, NHSF and the RSS in India is well illustrated by the 

Uttarakhand floods appeal in 2013. This humanitarian disaster became the basis of an appeal by Sewa 

International/Sewa UK. Fundraising was undertaken by NHSF and other Hindutva outfits ostensibly for 

neutral disaster relief and rehabilitation. However, what was not made clear in the UK is that the funds 

were intended for the Uttaranchal Daivi Aapda Peedit Sahayata Samiti, an organisation established directly 

by the RSS and which was raising funds for, among other things, a range of RSS educational projects aimed 

at furthering Hindutva ideology among school children. 7 

Hindu Sevika Samiti 

The Hindu Sevika Samiti is the HSS women’s affiliate formed in 1975. It is modelled on the RSS women’s 

affiliate (Rashtra Sevika Samiti) and has about thirty shakhas in the UK, attended weekly by around 500 

women and girls. 

Overseas Friends of the BJP 

OFBJP was formed in 1991 to provide support for the Indian BJP and BJP politicians. OFBJP and other 

organisations set up by HSS figures organized the visit of Narendra Modi to Britain in 2003 and are actively 

working to promote him in the build up to the Indian General Election in May 2014. 

The Vishwa Hindu Parishad UK 

VHP UK was formed in 1971 and acquired charitable status in 1972. VHP UK has about a dozen branches 

including in London, Bolton, Bradford, Leicester, Manchester, Birmingham, Northampton and Nottingham. 

The first VHP temple was established in Bolton in the mid-1970s, followed by two other temples, 

including the VHP Ilford Hindu Centre in north-east London. VHP UK is involved in the Interfaith Network 

(UK), various Standing Advisory Councils on Religious Education (SACREs), and other local Hindu 

Councils. It has also been involved in several campaigns against what it believes to be insulting representations 

of Hindu deities. 

7 http://www.rss.org/Encyc/2013/6/19/Uttarakhand-Calamity--RSS,-VHP-active-in-rescue-operations.aspx 


Hindu Sahitya Kendra 

A bookshop disseminating Hindutva literature in the UK and based at the HSS UK headquarters in Leicester. 

HINDUTVA SUPPORTING OUTFITS AND INDIVIDUALS 

Saffron Chase 

Saffron Chase is a public relations company established by activists Vikas Pota and Manoj Ladwa, both longterm 

associates of HSS, NHSF, Sewa International and other Hindutva projects in the UK. Saffron Chase is a 

very small company that appears to be largely inactive now. Its company motto is ‘Managing Perceptions’ and it 

has been credited with working to rehabilitate Narendra Modi – ‘the butcher of Gujarat’ – in the UK. Its literature 

sought to present him as an efficient international statesman committed to business and ‘development’. It 

has been claimed that Saffron Chase was instrumental in changing the current coalition government’s orientation 

towards Narendra Modi. 8 

Labour Friends of India 

LFI has, for a large part of its existence, been more aptly called ‘Labour Friends of the RSS’. This has been the 

case particularly under the former chairpersonship of Barry Gardiner MP, a long-term supporter of Hindutva 

organisations in the UK. Key figures in the office of LFI have been committed HSS ideologues and BJP supporters, 

and the agenda of LFI has been driven, to a great extent, by the activities of HSS-associated figures. 

This work is supplemented by other work in the Labour Party and in parliament by long-term associates of 

the HSS such as Vikas Pota, Sanjay Jagatia, Manoj Ladwa, Nilesh Solanki, Jayesh Jotangia among others. A new 

parliamentary forum, the All Party Parliamentary Group for British Hindus, arose from this impulse and has 

significant practical support from UK Hindutva associates. 9 

Barry Gardiner MP 

Barry Gardiner has been the most important political figure in the endeavour to rehabilitate and normalise 

extreme right-wing Hindutva fascism in Britain. It is ironic that a figure identified with the labour movement 

colludes with the most extremist of right-wing ideologies, one that was inspired by Fascism and National Socialism 

and led to the murder of Gandhi. Gardiner has had a very long association with the RSS’s family of 

organisations in the UK, including HSS, VHP UK, OFBJP and Sewa International among others, energetically 

supporting the events and activities of UK Hindutva organisations. He has defended VHP and RSS positions in 

Parliament and worked tirelessly to promote Narendra Modi in the UK. 

8 Sinha, P. ‘UK Based Hindutva Lobbyists Manoj Ladwa and Vikas Pota – Driving Force Behind Modi’s UK Invitation’, 25 August 2013, http://www.truthofgujarat.com/uk-based-hindutva-lobbyists-manoj-ladwa-vikas-pota-driving-force-behind-modis-uk-invitation/ 

9 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/register/hindus.htm; http://www.cityhindusnetwork.org.uk/appg/ 


63

SOURCES 

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, Spearheading National Renaissance, Prakashan Vibhag, Bangalore, 

1985. 

Sanghshakti Vijetreeyam, Antar Rashtriya Sahyog Pratishthan, Ahmedabad, 12 December 1995. 

Tattwawadi, S. Sarsanghchalak goes abroad: a collection of lectures delivered by Prof. Rajendra Singh 

on foreign land, Suruchi Prakashan, New Delhi, 1995. 



65

! 

! 

Published by Awaaz Network ! 

& The Monitoring Group! 

editor@awaaz-uk.org! 

www.awaaz-uk.org!

Modi-Exposed-2014-Report-Copyright-awaaz

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?