No Riots in Gujarat, MP, UP & Chhattisgarh After Our Govts Came To Power: BJP Chief Amit Shah. All Claims False
Mumbai: “Hamari sarkare baar baar kyu aati hai? Gujarat mai hum 27 saal se shaasan me hai, Madhya Pradesh me 15 saal, Chhattisgarh me 15 saal se.. kyu baar baar sarkare ati hai.. development hi toh kaaran hai. Aur hum par aarop lagate hai ki hum communal party hai. Hamari sarkar banne ke baad, Gujarat me ek bhi danga nahi hua, Madhya Pradesh me ek bhi danga nahi hua, Chhattisgarh me ek bhi danga nahi hua. Uttar Pradesh me hamari sarkar banne ka baad dange band hue hai.”
(“Why do our governments return to power? In Gujarat, we have governed for 27 years, in Madhya Pradesh for 15 years, in Chhattisgarh for 15 years. Why do our governments return? Development is the main reason. And they accuse us of being a communal party. After our government was formed in Gujarat, not even a single riot took place. In Madhya Pradesh not a single riot occurred, in Chhattisgarh not a single riot occurred. In Uttar Pradesh, after our government was formed, riots have stopped.”)
These were the claims made by Amit Shah, president of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), on November 23, 2018, in an interview to Zee News.
Shah’s claims are false.
Gujarat reported 35,568 riots from 1998 to 2016, according to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) Crime in India data and FactChecker research.
Madhya Pradesh reported 32,050 riots from 2003 to 2016, Chhattisgarh reported 12,265 riots from 2003 to 2016, and Uttar Pradesh reported 195 communal riots in 2017.
Claim: After our government was formed in Gujarat, not a single riot took place.
Fact: False. Including the 2002 Gujarat riots, 35,568 riots were reported between 1998 and 2016 during the BJP rule in the state, according to NCRB data.
The BJP has been in power in the state since 1998.
During the 2002 Gujarat riots, 1,044 were reported killed, 223 missing, and 2,500 injured, according to a reply by the home ministry to the Rajya Sabha (upper house of Parliament) on May 11, 2005.
Some organisations have contended that the number of people killed could be higher.
There were 164 communal riots and 305 victims in the state between 2014 and 2016, according to NCRB data.
In 2014, NCRB changed its method of collection and dissemination of crime data.
“Before 2014, all the data related to riots used to be collected under one head called ‘riots’, Factly.in, a data journalism portal, reported on December 7, 2017.
“From 2014, the data on riots is categorised into sub-heads, namely communal riots, industrial riots and riots for political reasons.”
There have been mismatches in data released by the home ministry and NCRB for 2014, 2015 and 2016, Factly reported.
Claim: In Madhya Pradesh, not a single riot..
Fact: False. There were 32,050 riots during the BJP rule in the state from 2003 to 2016, according to NCRB data.
The BJP has been in power in the state since 2003.
There were 109 communal riots and 138 victims in the state between 2014 and 2016, according to NCRB data.
Claim: In Chhattisgarh, not a single riot after our government was formed.
Fact: False. There were 12,265 reported incidents of ‘riots’ during the BJP rule in the state from 2003 to 2016, according to NCRB data.
BJP has been in power in the state since 2003.
There were two communal riots and five victims in the state between 2014 and 2016, according to NCRB data.
|Communal Riots In Chhattisgarh: 2014 To 2017|
|Year||Communal Incidents (MHA)||Communal Riots (NCRB)|
Claim: In Uttar Pradesh, after our government was formed, riots have stopped.
Fact: False. Uttar Pradesh reported 195 communal riots in 2017, according to this reply to the Lok Sabha on February 6, 2018.
While 44 people were killed in these riots, 542 people were injured, data show.
BJP came to power in the state in March 2017. UP had recorded 60 communal incidents in the first five months (January-May) of 2017, IndiaSpend reported on August 12, 2017.
Anmol Alphonso is an intern with IndiaSpend and FactChecker.
We welcome feedback. Please write to email@example.com. We reserve the right to edit responses for language and grammar.