In the complex landscape of indian politics, prime minister narendra Modi’s approach to law and order has come under intense scrutiny, particularly regarding his differing stances in gujarat and West Bengal. Critics argue that these contradictions reveal a troubling double standard in the administration of justice, raising questions about the motivations behind his policies.

Gujarat: The Controversial Release of Convicts

The controversy began in august 2022, when the gujarat government, under the BJP’s rule, decided to release 11 men convicted of gang rape and murder during the 2002 gujarat riots. These men had been sentenced to life imprisonment for their heinous crimes, which shocked the nation and left deep scars on the victims and their families. However, after serving 14 years, they were granted early release, a decision that was met with widespread outrage across India.

The release was seen by many as a betrayal of justice, particularly for the victims of the 2002 riots. Human rights activists, opposition parties, and ordinary citizens alike condemned the move, arguing that it sent a dangerous message about the state’s commitment to protecting women and upholding the rule of law. The decision to release the convicts was criticized as politically motivated, aimed at appeasing certain voter bases in Gujarat.

West Bengal: The Call for Harsh Punishments

In stark contrast to the leniency shown in gujarat, narendra Modi’s stance on crime and punishment in West bengal has taken a decidedly harsher tone. As the bjp seeks to expand its influence in the state, where it faces strong opposition from the trinamool congress (TMC), Modi has called for strict action against those committing crimes against women, even advocating for the death penalty for rapists.

This tough-on-crime rhetoric in West bengal is seen by critics as a calculated political move, aimed at portraying the bjp as the party of law and order in a state where crime and violence have been hot-button issues. Modi’s calls for hanging rapists in West bengal stand in stark contrast to the actions taken by his government in gujarat, leading many to accuse him of hypocrisy.

A Politically Charged Narrative

The contrasting approaches in gujarat and West bengal have not gone unnoticed by political commentators and opposition leaders. The trinamool congress, in particular, has been vocal in highlighting what they see as a glaring double standard. They argue that Modi’s differing stances are not about justice, but rather about political expediency—lenient in a state where the bjp is in power, and harsh in a state where it is trying to gain control.

This narrative has sparked debate across the country about the integrity of the justice system and the influence of politics on decisions that should be guided by law and morality. For many, the situation underscores the challenges india faces in ensuring that justice is served uniformly, regardless of political considerations.

Conclusion

As india grapples with these complex issues, the actions and policies of its leaders will continue to be scrutinized. The contrasting stances of prime minister narendra Modi in gujarat and West bengal serve as a potent reminder of the intersection between politics and justice. In a country as diverse and dynamic as india, the demand for consistent and fair application of the law remains a pressing concern—one that will undoubtedly shape the political discourse in the years to come.