Abstract

Prior to Election, the mingling of politics with religion was practised frequently throughout South Asia, including India. Modi, a fascist who employs the religion card to win the elections as Hindus are in the majority. The initiatives implemented in his first term helped him to win the 2019 elections. In addition, the popularity of Modi grew due to the Pulwama incident as he openly challenged and conducted an air strike against Pakistan. Modi won the second term with a promise to rebuild the Ram temple on the site of Babri Masjid, abrogate the special status of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, and implement the Anti-Citizenship Act. More hate towards religious minorities, especially Muslims, exacerbates the Hindu Vote Bank. The Hardcore majority of Hindus and BJP applauded such Anti-Muslim promises and assisted him in procuring massive seats in Lok Shaba.

Key Words

Fascist, Hindutva, RSS, Sedition Act, Anti-Citizenship Act

Introduction

Modi in Power for the Second Time 

2019 was the election year for India. Modi wanted BJP to win the 2019 election again. PM Modi and its member to design a new strategy so that plan of winning sees daylight. This Modi promised to avenge the perpetrators of the Pulwama attack. Who, according to Modi, was a Pakistani militant group working on the instructions of Pakistan. Furthermore, in his public rallies, he indicated the scarping of all Articles of 370 and 35A, construction of Ayodah Temple on the place of Babari Masjid, and the formation of the NRC list so that Hindus and other non-Muslim minorities in India and the neighboring State can get the Citizenship of India. This time, more focus was on taking Revenge from Pakistan, creating difficulties for India’s Muslims, carrying the structural prejudice against Muslims in the Disputed Territory of Kashmir, and less on the development sector. In addition, Modi and his cabinet wanted to reduce the number of Muslim voters, and the deduction of the Muslim voters Meant an easy win for BJP. As these Muslim voters were voting for congress, the rival Party of BJP. So, Anti-CAA approved intentionally lowering the numbers of people from different religions except for Hindus, which worked very well for the BJP. After winning the Election, Modi and his Ministers openly supported the implementation of the Anti-CAA act. To fulfill his words after becoming prime Minister for the second time, Modi implemented the Anti-CAA act starting from Assam Modi’s Government took the Anti-CAA to the other states. It also targeted Muslims and other religions. The Pro-Hindus admired Modi’s forecasting to the extent that the BJP, under Modi’s leadership, won 300 seats out of 543, breaking all the previous records. This time Modi did not need any coalition from other parties to form a Government. Soon Coming to Power, the first step was Scraping all Articles of 370 and 35A, giving Kashmir special status.




Abolishment of Article 370 and 35 A

Scraping the Article decision was celebrated by Pro Hindus and resisted by Muslims in all parts of India, especially in the India disputed territory of Kashmir. Before Announcing the decision, tens of Army deployed in Kashmir, all the Schools, markets, and businesses were forcefully shut down, Mobile and Internet services were cut off, and tourists living and visiting Kashmir were told to move out of the Valley and not to visit until the situation becomes normal. On August 5, 2019, all Articles of 370 and 35a were abolished. Amit Shah announced the decision in the Rajya Sabha, which approved Jammu and Kashmir recognition, Bill. Shah told the parliament that abolishment has been done under the presidential order, and it will divide the Occupied Kashmir into two union territories, with Kashmir having a Hindu population and an assembly. In contrast, the Ladakh union will have Buddhists and Muslims in it, and no assembly will be formed in that union. Once the decision was publicly announced, a curfew has imposed. Article370 gives a special status to Occupied Kashmir. According to the Article, Kashmir can have their flag and Constitution. It limits the Power of the Indian parliament to make laws for occupied Kashmir. It can take any decision except in defense and foreign affairs, while Article 35A deals with the occupation of Land in OIJK. (Al Jazeera, 2019). The rest of the Indian citizens can not buy land in OIJK, and can not marry a Kashmiri girl; students will have notable quotes in universities and government jobs. Land can be purchased in OIJK if a person is living there before 1911. 

Modi and his cabinet knew they would face a severe backlash by Muslims from every corner of India. The first time, the intention of scarping these articles when shared with the public; they became furious. After announcing the decision, the former chief Minister J&K and other activists were under house arrest. Foreign and domestic Media was not given permission to cover the situation in OIJK. Children, women, and older people were on the street protesting against the Modi Decision and atrocities. Police used pellet guns, tear gas, and sticks to disperse the crowd. Pallet guns severely injured a number of children and adults. Police forcefully enter the Muslim homes at any time and drag the male members out of the home, beating them and killing them if little resistance is shown. This situation is not new for OIJK people. For the seven-decade, they have faced discrimination, but there is an increase in the degree of violence under the Modi era. Muslims of Kashmir are not allowed to celebrate holy occasions like Eid. Muharram processions are banned in OIJK. However, it has been more than a year since the Modi government is carrying out Human Rights violations in OIJK. Children cannot go to schools; no one can go to hospitals; families cannot get the Rashan from markets. Children and relatives living outside the OIJK can not contact their parents. (Saadia, 2020). After the removal of the Articles, Hindus have given Kashmiri land illegally. Many Hindu families are settling in OIJK under the direction of Modi. It will help the Hindus surpasses the number of Muslims in the region.  




International Community Reacting to Scraping of Article 370 

Even as China reflected severe concern about the dilemma in Kashmir in the light of India’s action to withdraw Article 370, which gave an exceptional status to the state, the international organization and community have extensively abstained from making statements. However, the cadenced responses have been mostly supportive. The US department of state quoted it as an internal issue of India, though it encouraged all stakeholders to strengthen peace. Some days ago, the American president, Donald Trump, ignited a controversy when he proposed to arbitrate between the two countries on the Kashmir issue during the Pakistan prime minister’s stay to Washington. UAE diplomat to India Ahmed Al Banna’s reaction is substantial since the tacit backing indicates that the Islamic world is not opposing India as Pakistan had expected it would be. Banna indicated that the UAE had considered India’s judgment of non-operationalization of some domains of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution associated with Jammu and Kashmir  (Mishra, 2020). He also phrased it as an internal problem specified by the Indian Constitution. He revealed that the reorganization of states was not unusual in the history of independent India and that it was primarily conducted to lessen regional discrepancy and expand efficiency. 

Apart from the UAE, India has furthermore upped its association with Saudi Arabia in a massive way. India was asked for the guest of honor at the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) meeting in Abu Dhabi, none the fewer uncertainties between India and Pakistan were elevated since the Balakot assault had just been carried out. Pakistan’s objections over Sushma Swaraj’s presence at the plenary were dismissed. The neighboring government of Sri Lanka has also applauded the play, spotlighting another aspect. Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe tweeted: “I appreciate Ladakh will finally evolve into a Union Territory. With approximately the 70 percent Buddhist, it will be the first Indian state with a Buddhist plurality. The composition of Ladakh and the substantial restructuring are India’s interior matters. I have toured Ladakh, and it is worth a visit.” India has been maneuvering hard at its diplomatic relations with neighbors through the ASEAN multilateral as well as through BIMSTEC  (Grant, 2019). India’s development assistance to Sri Lanka is boosting. A massive housing project is on, and India concentrates on early deliveries. Various homes at present have been assigned to beneficiaries. India, along with Japan, is also participating in the development of Colombo Port. Quoting Buddhist Ladakh and its advancement should harmonize with Buddhist Nations on India’s east. 

In reply to the revocation of Article 370, two house resolutions were mooted by Rep. Rashida Tlaib and Rep. Pramila Jaypal, respectively. Although these resolutions are not endorsed in the Senate for a vote, the fundamental inspection of India’s domestic strategy in the US Congress will likely impact international attitude. Also, the house perseverance also went at odds with a key principle of bipartisanship in US foreign policy with regard to Kashmir, which has habitually regaled the Kashmir controversy as India’s internal matter. The house resolution denounced the Indian state for unilaterally altering “the standing of the Kashmiri community without an explicit consultation or authorization of the Kashmiri people. This reasoning of India’s litigations in Kashmir bonded with determinations to deter clash through internet shutdowns and imposing house arrest on political adversaries further reinforced suspicions of a transition in how India pursues to establish supervision.

On the other hand, the European Union (EU) has preferred to embrace a relatively neutral attitude. The official statement of the EU in reaction to Article 370 stressed the significance of steps to reclaim the rights and sovereignty of the population in Kashmir. EU’s standpoint was reflected in response to the CAB constitution as well, whereas EU diplomat to India Ugo Astuto wished that the ordinance was in accordance with the high degree of the Indian constitution. The instantly unfolding EU-India strategic pact based on shared interest could clarify this neutral perspective. Recently regarded as a loveless arranged marriage, the EU-India coalition has enhanced in recent decades. The EU-India Summit in 2017 that solidified bilateral connections on endurable urbanization and climate change amounted to a venture of 800 million Euros in Indian solar projects. EU’s significant investments in India thus partly elucidate its reluctance to take an explicit perspective of chiding the CAA and Indian activities in Kashmir. 

Presumably, India’s most definitive manifestation of worrying international backlash for domestic strategies was the unofficial stop of an informal committee of the EU to the Kashmir Valley. When domestic envoys were forbidden from touring and taking stock of the scenario, the EU delegation’s stay certainly lifted eyebrows. Also, with 22 of the 27 EU commissions referring to the far right, the intentions behind their stay appeared to get tacit international assurance, reinstating the significance India established on its global image.

Abolishment of Articles 370 and 35 A led to the Human Right violation in the Kashmir valley

A journalist from Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (who does not want to reveal his identity) details that the Occupied Kashmir valley is famous for its tourist and Fruit business. Kashmir transports fruit to the whole of India. When Delivering fruits’ time is close, a curfew is intentionally imposed to wreck the business and break Muslims economically. This strategy is old, but in Modi’s time, the number of curfews increased to ruin the business and frustrate the Muslims to the point that they stopped fighting for an independent state. During Jumma prayers and prayers on the Holy occasion Tear, Gas is used by the Army on Muslims to disperse them as soon as prayer finishes so that ritual of Delivering a speech, which creates problems for the Army, could be avoided. The Army has Freehand in Kashmir. They do what they please. They bargain into the house in the middle of the night and torture the elders in front of the children. It forces the Muslims to the point where they pick up the fight against the Army and have only one option to die for the cause. After abolishing the articles, Modi’s popularity increased in the Hindu faction. He is more muscular than before. The country’s economic condition is getting worse day by day, but Pro-Hindus are happy because Modi is suppressing Muslims. Internationally, Modi gave everyone a clear message that he could do whatever he wanted to do, especially to Pakistan

Dr. Manzoor Afridi (personal conversation) talks about Modi’s takes on OJK; it is to make it an integral part of India against the resolutions oF the United Nations Security Council, the norms of International Law (IL), and the countries that play the mediator’s part of solving Kashmir’s problem with Pakistan and India. Modi wants to teach a lesson to Pakistan by making by changing the demographics of OJK. The Modi government carries a human rights violation in OJK as Kashmiri freedom fighter gives the Indian military a tough time. It was high time to take strict Action against freedom fighters and takedown OJK’s mujahedeen. Modi saw the Kashmir situation is getting out of Indian control and his hands, so he increased the number of military in OJK. With the increase, structural violence increased against Muslims, which ultimately increased Modi popularity in the Hindu community.

Tanveer Shah from occupied Jammu and Kashmir talks about the situation environment of OJK after the abolishment of the Articles. He shares his personal experiences. There is a ban on Media on the coverage of brutalities carried out by the Indian Army. Modi divides the Muslims by implicating the representative of Muslims in OJK as Traitors and buying a few Muslims who work on the Modi agenda. Main parties like; Jammu & Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) and People Democratic Party (PDP) are Munifiq as they are helping to propagate Modi’s motive in OJK. Youngsters are targets of the Indian Army and arrested under the Public Safety Act; they are beaten and killed under the Law; Pallet guns are used to make people of OJK blind. Curfews are imposed from time to time. Internet service is down; only 2G is coming.      

Dr. Muhammad Khan (personal conversation) details the abrogation of articles 370 and 35A were done for political benefits as part of the 2019 election manifesto. Modi promised the people that his Government would undo these articles. It will settle the non-inhabitant of OJK to settle in OJK. Hundreds of thousands of non-Kashmiri are given the domicile of the State of the Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. Through this, Modi has given the impression to 1.3 billion Hindus that we have fulfilled our promise. The Indians feel otherwise, and Kashmiris feel differently. Kashmiri believes that their identity and State have diluted into a union territory. It has never happened in history. The union territory has always upgraded to the State’s status, but the case is the opposite. Here the established State is torn down into a union territory. This move is the gain of the BJP, not India, because pro-political parties who supported  India, like the National Conference of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, are overtly saying to accept the Chinese occupation. However, it did not accept the Indian occupation after Articles 370 and 35 A were abolished.  

Amir Abbasi from Duniya TV (Personal Conversation) explains that Modi made these extremist Hindus his allies by talking about abrogating articles 370 and 35 A and demolishing the Babri masjid. After winning the Election, he fulfilled his promise. Demographic change and hegemony in the Region were Modi’s goals, so; these articles have been abolished. Much resistance has been seen from the Muslims of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmiris are protesting, but they have suppressed them through the Army. Very little coverage from Indian media has been given to Kashmir. 

Anti-Citizen Amendment Bill

The Citizen Amendment Bill first brought to Lok Shaba in 2016. The majority cleared this as BJP has a clear majority in the lower parliament. The Citizen Amendment Act is a structured injustice towards India’s Muslims as its fast track the asylum requisition of Non-Muslims illegitimate refugees from  Muslim-majority neighboring countries of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. According to Citizen Amendment Bill, Muslims who fail to prove their citizenship will be detained and deported. At the same time, people from other religions, like Sikhs, Christians, and Jains, will be given citizenship even if they are illegal immigrants. The CAB yoked with the government push to link the National Population Register (NPR) with the National Register of Citizen (NRC), steered to cataloging illegal migrants, has led hundreds of Muslims, including their families, to fall in fear of stripping of their citizenship right despite living for generations in India. NPR is a National Population Register representing the total number of people living in India, whether they are citizens or not.

In comparison, NRC is a national citizenship register, referring to India’s legal citizens. During the first phase, which started in 2018 in Assam, millions of Muslims could not give the document due for several reasons, consequently labeled illegal citizens. On August 31, 2019, the NRC final report was published, leaving 1.9 million people of Assam, mostly Muslims, who had lived their whole lives in India and few cases for many years. The NRC is the list of people who have proof that they migrated to India one day before the formation of an independent Bangladesh, i.e., March 24, 1975. Muslims of Assam’s people informed the higher authorities that the people were left out because they had lost the documents while shifting their homes for livelihood, fear of Hindus, marriage, and sometimes displacement due to flooding.

In contrast, the rest reported discriminatory behavior by officials. The officials’ procedure and decision were arbitrary and partisan as officials applied more stringent affirmation rule regarding documentation of majority Muslim Bengali who was suspected to be a non-original inhabitant of India. While intentionally overlooking the poorer residents who survived on essential sustenance, they establish citizen claims dating decades back when they did not have access and knowledge regarding identity documentation. Moreover, women are more likely to have access to identity documentation as compared to men. Many women do not have birth certificates, so they never attended school. Besides, they are married before 18, the legal age to vote, so the first document they have is a voter identification card with their husbands’ names, making it nearly impossible to establish the link with their parents. The Human Rights Watch (HRW) also highlights that the state identification card is prone to mistakes (Bajoria, 2020). People provided authentic documents proving their citizens are still not incorporated in the National Registry of citizenship because of technical reasons like spelling mistakes or different spelling used in different documents. Also, HRW found and raised the concerns of Foreign Tribunals, which decided the question of Citizen stated the procedure lack transparency and show negligence in following uniform procedures, often giving inconsistent decisions. Officials do not work independently and often exposed to higher authorities pressure as Government is continuously monitoring their performance, and their performance is judged by how many families they have identified as illegal.

Once a citizen takes a matter to the lower Court, it can only challenge in the Supreme Court, a regular justice system throughout the world. If a person regarding citizenship gets cleared by the Tribunal, it still can be summoned based on suspicions. Once a person is declared an illegal habitant by the Tribunal. Then that person is detained by the Police and sent to detention centers. As of November 2019, 988 people detained once; they were declared foreigners. Modi also announced making ten detention centers in the State of Assam. Modi also sent a Model Detention Manual in January 2019 to all the states and districts to set up detention centers. More numbers of detention centers were built on Modi’s direction in the district or State where mass migration was documented. The voices were raised when authorities have changed the tacks before publishing the final report on Modi’s instruction. To incorporate Bengali Hindus, a strong vote base for BJP. It also made it easy for Bangali Hindus to get citizenship and to stay in Assam. 

Assam’s whole incident made other Muslims in Utter Pardesh, Delhi, and the rest of India concerned and furious. Due to systematic injustice, Riots erupted in various states, mainly in Shaheen Bhag- a place near India, Delhi. Where Muslims were peacefully protesting before the situation got worsed with the involvement of Hindu Mobs; Hindu mobs attacked Muslim mosques, houses, and businesses. The riot killed 13 people. (BBC News, 2020). The whole incident divided the protesters into religious lines. Videos started emerging on the electrical Media showing angry Hindus beating Muslim groups of 4 people to sing Bande Mataram forcefully. One of the four men died on the spot. Kapil Mishra threatened the Muslims to call off the protest before the arrival of Donald Trump by giving an ultimatum to Police through different social media apps; he held a pro-CAA really in Jaffrabad, triggered the communal riots, which took 20 lives, mostly Muslims. (Bedi, 2020). In the Shaheen Bhag incident, the behavior of the Police was biased. It did not arrest BJP workers and members who attacked the peaceful protest of Muslims and injured many.

Nevertheless, they arrested the Muslim protestor for protesting against the Anti-Citizen Amendment Bill and Modi’s discriminatory behavior; Police also harassed and arrested the Muslim students who were supporting the protest. Police forcefully entered two leading universities in Delhi and the Northern city of Aligarh. Police entered the campuses and attacked the students inside the library, toilets, and universities’ reading halls. Disturbing videos of policemen man dragging students on student campuses, beating them with sticks, and arresting them have gone viral. The whole incident fueled anger among the Muslim student community.  (Biswas, 2018). The youth of India is full of talent and ambition is frustrated now. They believe the Government should create jobs so the slow-going economy can get better rather than investing all its time and energy on a law that is further polarizing India. Many Peaceful Muslim student protestors were thrown out from different universities on the grounds of supporting Muslim student protests, creating an environment of abusiveness and hostility towards the Government initiatives. Few students are in jails booked under the Sedition law. On January 30, 2020, the Police did not arrest the government supporter for killing a Muslim protestor at Jamia Millia University (JMU). The partisan Action of Police in The JMU has been encouraged by Modi and his party members’ biased statements.  

The Citizen Amendment Bill became controversial when Modi and Amit Shah, the Minister of Home Affairs, repeatedly assured every Citizen that NPR is to count the number of people living in India than publicly taking a U-turn on their own decisions. Modi government’s purpose is to make an NPR database to count the usual resident in India’s whole, providing the details of every Citizen living in which area; if they stayed there for more than six months, what will they live in the future for the next six months. The database will provide a demographic view as well as biometric information of citizens living in India. In the first phase, no one will be marked doubtful  (Mahmudabad, 2019-2020). However, the rules and criteria for verifying have not patently been told or written. Who will be suspected doubtful, and how can they claim and verify citizenship? The dubious process raises concern over the bias and arbitrariness of officials, similar to Assam’s situation. Citizens do not need documentation paper in the counting process as it is just to acknowledge the number of  People living in India irrespective of their citizenship status. The documents are required while preparing the NRC list. Soon after the BJP first won in 2014, then Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju told the parliament that NPR should complete its task and give a logical conclusion, which will incorporate in the formation of NRIC (National Register of Indian Citizens). Amit Shah, in December 2019, said there is no connection between NPR and NRC. In March 2020, he told the parliament that in the NPR process, no documents were needed.

Moreover, no one will be marked as doubtful. Shah publicly conveyed the message that Hindus in other parts of the country will be protected in the verification process. He further stated, “I want to assure all Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Buddhist, and Christian refugees that you will not force to leave India.” he purposely omitted the Muslims from the list of protected religions. Shah, on many occasions, publicly labeled Muslims as infiltrators. While defending the bill in the parliament, Amit Shah said, “There is a fundamental difference between a refugee and an infiltrator. This bill is for refugees.” For Amit Shah, the bill is for all non-Muslims who face persecution in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan. While addressing the Muslim protestors, Shah said they should go to Pakistan if Indian Muslims feel that discrimination is done against them. 

Global Community Response to Anti-CAA Bill

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) has provoked violent reactions from the international Nation. While the government has handled nationwide discord with hardy revengeful measures, the scheme appears to have ricocheted, further magnifying the ridge between the opposition and the bill’s advocator. Notably, the resonance of dissension has not just been endured within India. The global world appears to have taken reservoir of the complete anti-CAA riots across India and the perceived significance of the constitution on minority notions  (Amnesty International, 2020). With the execution of the CAA appearing on the heels of the judgment to abolish Article 370, the BJP’s vigorous Hindutva bearing appraising domestic policy judgments is manipulating the foundational doctrine of religious fusion that emphasized many of India’s crucial strategic coalitions. The global reactions have varied from open denunciation to tactful impartiality relying on the essence of the alliance and the magnitude to which ‘shared values’ notify the same. Further, since Prime Minister Narendra Modi has formally revealed his curiosity about stabilizing India’s bonds with the tastes of the United States, China, and the European Union, assessing the aftermath of these legislations beyond the domestic acrimony is pertinent  (Nagarwal, 2020).

The US critique of India’s rightward transition was reproduced in their response to the dubious CAA. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USIRF) elevated concerns over the suggested ordinance even before the Rajya Sabha authorized it. It designed the statute as borrowing religion as a course to citizenship to be against the kernel tenet of religious pluralism. Characterizing the bill as a treacherous roll in the wrong orientation, the USIRF retained that the bill thwarted the extensively democratic doctrine. It drove on against Amit Shah and other conscientious leaders. The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) announced that it was progressively concerned by the CAA due to its obvious intolerance of Indian Muslims. The OIC has recently communicated a sympathetic impression towards debilitated Muslims as indicated in their desire to eliminate primarily Muslim factions in struggling for autonomy against tyrannical regimes from the interpretation of terrorism. 

More startling was the response of China, which chose to issue a joint announcement with Pakistan. The joint message by India’s next-door neighbors restrained any unilateral penalties entangling the situation. India, frequently contemplated as a natural balancer to China’s thriving influence, was particularly susceptible to Chinese discontent. Japan PM Shinzo Abe’s stay Vainto, too, was hampered, referring to increasingly brutal uproars in Assam. Only time will tell if the illustrations mentioned above of global acceptance of India’s domestic protocol decisions would badly influence key foreign strategy issues and surely foreign ventures opportunities through agenda such as the Make in India endeavor. However, it is apparent that India is worried about its global portrayal and has taken numerous steps to respond to the growing understanding of it being a tyrannical regime. In reaction to whispers of American boycotts against Amit Shah, India declined USIRF’s concerns as neither factual nor appropriate. When Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad doubted the requirement of the CAA and groaned at the blistering of Secularism in India, rather than a general confutation, India’s MEA went a notch further asked for the Charge D’ Affairs of the Malaysian embassy to demonstrate fretfulness. 

With revolts against CAA amassing momentum across the world in areas like Chicago, Boston, and Hague, among others, India’s global impression as the world’s biggest liberal democracy is under the skim. Whether forcefully worded acknowledgments by the MEA and biased International councils aiding India’s viewpoint work to enhance that image is a contradiction still eluding apparent unanimity. Nonetheless, a renewal of domestic and international plans appears to be crucial in order to deter further aspersion of a global portrayal that took decades to secure.




Sedition Act 

Section 124 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) supervise Sedation, states, “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which a fine may be added; or, with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which a fine may be added; or, with fine.”  (Modak, 2020). “Disaffection” and “disapprobation” forms the core of section 124 A. It has been at the core of dubiousness over applying and interpreting the Law. A person booked under the sedition law faces prison time from three years to life imprisonment. Once a citizen has been booked under the Sedition Act, he/she can not apply for any Government Jobs. They have to surrender their passwords and should be available for Court when required. Under the Sedition Act, a citizen can not apply for bail. From 2014 to 2019, it has been used as a tool. Many citizens in Assam, Haryana, Bihar, and Jharkhand have been arrested under the Sedition Act. Media outlets are furious due to tha use of the Sedition Act. They believe that Modi intentionally tried to press the voices highlighting his ill policies, discriminatory behavior, and lies. Muslims protesting in Asam against Anti-CAA have been imprisoned under the Act. Kashmiri Muslims are the target. Many have booked under the Act, protesting against abolishing Articles 370 and 35 A. In a speech, if citizens are Critcizsing the Modi policies or educating people through Magazines, Social Media, and electronic Media regarding the injustice done by Modi and his governors means any time a citizen can be imprisoned. 

While the Supreme Court listening to the Sedition cases, passed the Judgment that only the Action with the “Tendency” to incite or incite public disorder or violence comes under seditious acts. The term Tendency and public disorder have left open interpretations used by Police to suppress dissent. The Government recently amended the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), which gives the Government the Power to seize the properties of individuals who have declared themselves “terrorists.” People are in fear after experiencing the Sedition Act, and Muslims believe that UAPA will also be used as a tool against them to get rid of them. Muslims who raise their voices against Modi is either Infiltrators or Terrorists.  (Yadav, 2020).

Conclusion

In both of his terms, Modi intentionally discriminated against minorities, mainly targeting Muslims. All this was done to win the Election of 2019. In 2019 Modi broke all the records and formed a government with a coalition. Intolerance against minorities and different casts has been increased in Modi both terms. Modi fulfilled all his promises to Pro-Hindus while ignoring the rest of the cast and religion. Modi portrayed himself as a member of  OBC and successfully secured Dalits’ votes. Saffron people have become more aggressive with time towards other religions. Beating other people because of eating cow meat, protesting against biased government decisions, and demanding their basic rights has become common. Saffron terrorism is at its peak, encouraged by Modi and BJP-selected governors.

References

• Al Jazeera. (2019, August 5). Kashmir special status explained: What are Articles 370 and 35A? AL JAZEERA:
• Amnesty International. (2020, March 3). Amnesty International. india: international community must condemn crimes against PEACEFUL PROTESTERS:
• Bajoria, J. (2020). "Shoot the Traitors" Discrimination against Muslims under India’s New Citizenship Policy. Human Right Watch.
• BBC News. (2020, February 25). Delhi clashes: Thirteen killed as Hindu and Muslim groups clash. BBC News:
• Bedi, A. (2020, Februray 20). Who is Kapil Mishra? BJP leader being blamed for Delhi riots had once called Modi ISI agent. The Print.in:
• Biswas, S. (2018, December 18). Citizenship Amendment Act: The students versus the regime. BBC News.
• Grant, M. L. (2019, November 14). The International Community Has A Role To Play In Resolving the Kashmir Crisis Forbes:
• Mahmudabad, A. K. (2019-2020). Indian Muslims and the Anti-CAA Protests: From Marginalization towards Exclusion.
• Mishra, V. K. (2020). The Abrogation of Article 370 International Reactions. JSTOR, 120-129.
• Modak, S. (2020, Feburary 7). Explained: Sedition law — what courts said. Indian Express.
• Nagarwal, N. (2020, January 16). Global Implications of India’s Citizenship Amendment Act 2019. Russian International Affairs Council.
• Saadia, H. A. (2020, July 20). Kashmir: a torture cell for Muslims. The Nations.
• Yadav, A. (2020, January 21). How India uses colonial-era sedition law against CAA protesters. AL JAZEERA.