The first development was Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision restoring the Congress Government in Arunachal Pradesh. The second was the Congress high command’s outmaneuvering the BJP in Arunachal Pradesh by winning back its rebels followed by asking its chief minister Nabam Tuki to resign to pave the way for the rebel MLA PemaKhanchi for taking over as chief minister.

The upshot of the apex court’s decision is that it has saved democracy from being muzzled by the NDA government and the state governor’s undemocratic actions.

In its order on Wednesday the Supreme Court had restored the Congress government which had been dismissed in December 2015 on the recommendation of the governor by abusing Article 356 and the imposition of President’s Rule in the state. In its order, the Supreme Court had made scathing comments against the NDA government, especially against the Governor Jyoti Prasad Rajkhowa, for playing the role of a partisan politician for installing a BJP-backed government of Congress rebels.

That our bhagwa politicians do not hesitate even to use ‘holy cow’ politics for partisan purposes was also proved by Rajkhowa’s earlier ridiculous action of citing an incident of cow slaughter to make a case for a breakdown of law and order in the state while recommending President’s Rule in the state.

The Arunachal case was apparently a part of the Modi government’s two-pronged strategy to achieve its objective of making India a Congress-mukt Bharat by destabilizing the democratically elected state governments and capturing power in the non-BJP ruled states. Under its no-holds-barred strategy, the BJP has been trying to topple these governments preferably by winning over opposition’s vulnerable legislators of the “Aya Rams Gaya Rams” variety or by creating situations which would make it impossible for the opposition’s governments to continue in power.

The strategy was used first to topple the Congress-ruled Uttarakhand and then the Arunachal Pradesh government by misusing Article 356. The goal was to capture power by luring Aya Rams to rebel. But it failed both in Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh.

The Modi-led government is not the first to misuse Article 356 to get rid of the governments ruled by opposition parties. Its predecessor governments, particularly of the Congress, had also been abusing this Constitutional provision to get rid of the opposition-ruled governments.

After Arunachal and Uttarakhand, now Delhi’s Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government, which had assumed power by inflicting a crushing defeat on the BJP by winning 67 of the 70 Assembly seats, seems to be the Modi government’s target. Kejrival has said that hurdles are being created in the way of his government’s normal functioning.

The moves to get rid of the Congress-ruled Arunachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments obviously represented the Modi-Amit Shah-duo’s desperate attempts to at least neutralize the negative effects of the humiliating setbacks the BJP had received first in Delhi Assembly polls and then in Bihar elections. Now they seem to be desperately trying to win maximum number of seats in the country’s most populous state of UP where the party had in 2014 won 73 of its 80 Lok Sabha seats.

To achieve the objective, the BJP which has been trying to project itself to be a non-communal party is desperately trying to polarize the UP’s electorate on communal and caste lines as reflected by the Kairana episode. (Elections in Maharashtra, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Manipur and Goa are scheduled for 2017).

Hukam Singh, the party MP of the area had alleged that there was exodus of Hindus from the Muslim-dominated village. In support of his claim, he circulated a list of the Hindu families who, he alleged, had been forced to leave the village. But when media’s investigating teams and a deputation of non-BJP parties which visited the village quoted facts to falsify the BJP MP’s claim of “Hindus exodus”, Hukam Singh took a U-turn saying that what he meant was that criminal gangs had forced some families to leave the village.

The BJP president Amit Shah’s desperation to communally polarize the state was also reflected by his instant comments, made without waiting for official confirmation, about the alleged “exodus of Hindus” from Kairana. He had expressed his concern on the issue at the BJP convention in Allahabad. But despite the setback, the saffron party is likely to continue its polarization attempts, particularly in the poll-bound Hindu-majority states.

But the Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh developments indicate that the BJP may have to face formidable challenge from the opposition parties which despite their inter-party and intra-party squabbles may forge Bihar-like mahagathbandhans by treating it as a challenge for their survival in power.

Functioning of Indian democracy lends credence to what the British writer E.M. Foster had said “Two cheers for democracy, one because it admits variety, and two because it permits criticism” (IPA Service)