Why does Congress spare Narendra Modi on fake encounters?

On November 22, all newspapers had screaming headlines about the SIT report concluding that the Ishrat Jahan encounter was fake.

The reports that followed the headlines pronounced the development as a 'big setback for the Narendra Modi government'.

Activists and victims chased the media to say that their prophecy had come true. But strangely the reaction from one quarter was rather muted - politicians, especially Congress leaders.

Within minutes, hectic calculations and consultations with lawyers were underway to fathom the outcome of the SIT report but public statements were not forthcoming from the Congress.

When approached, a response was registered but no official statements demanding 'the resignation of CM Modi under whose regime innocents were murdered,' etc, were made.

The clean image of his establishment that Modi takes pride in and on the basis of which he is pitching for the prime minister's post, has been tarnished by the SIT report. In any other establishment, where three fake encounters had been proven and many more are likely to be proved, the CM would be under great opposition pressure and desperately seeking measures to save his job.

But not Modi. He is busy with his political blitzkrieg. When the HC disclosed the SIT report in court on Monday, Modi was distributing awards to ITI students in Gandhinagar and, on Tuesday, ironically sitting on Sadbhavana fast in Vapi. One of the main reasons Modi can get away with this politically is the Congress's decision not to use the fake encounters in Gujarat as a political issue - at least till the cases are totally resolved in court.

The genesis of this decision lies in recent history - to be precise, in the 2007 elections when the Congress had raised the Sohrabuddin Sheikh fake encounter as poll issue.

Congress president Sonia Gandhi had, at a rally, labeled Modi a 'Maut ka Saudagar' (trader in death) for getting 'innocents' like Sohrabuddin killed in fake encounters.

The statement boomeranged on the Congress as Modi swiftly took on Sonia's statement. He seemed to justify the killing of Sohrabuddin in a fake encounter saying that if the slain man was not a terrorist, he was definitely a proven criminal. And if he was killed to control crime, what was wrong with it, Modi had argued.

Outrageous as it may sound, the electorate was seemingly sold on this logic and the BJP returned to power with a resounding majority. Post-election analysis revealed that Sonia's 'Maut Ka Sadagar' statement had an adverse effect on the Congress's electoral fortunes.

Once burnt, twice shy. Since then, there has been an unstated decision of sorts in the Congress not to touch any fake encounters (especially those in which Muslims had been killed) as political issues for campaigns.

In fact, ever since the party's drubbing in the 2002 polls after the post-Godhra riots, Gujarat Congress has been reticent in taking up issues of the minority community in a big way.

For the fake encounters too they feel that the public's view on encounters is that even if the victim of an encounter was not a terrorist, the killing of an antisocial element is justified even if the law has been broken. Besides, as a politician confided, pinning the blame for the encounters on Modi is technically difficult as he is not directly an accused in these cases -yet, as Amit Shah is.

"So if the Congress raises fake encounters as an issue, one ends up blaming the police who actually just pulled the trigger but were not the masterminds themselves. Moreover, it is definitely not an issue that affects the rural and urban populace alike as corruption does," the politician said.

Fair enough. So, will Modi get away with these fake encounters? Politically, in Gujarat, for now, most likely - yes. It is his next step where he wants to ascend to in national politics where he may not get away that easily.