ગુજરાતી
Hardly anyone would be unaware of the empire of Ahmedabad ‘Don’ Abdul Latif in the 1980s. Latif had influence in Gujarat. Fear spread among the police.
There is talk of his crime, murder, illegal liquor business empire.
Latif was active in politics. He had relations with many leaders. Latif and his empire also had a profound impact on the society and politics of Gujarat.
BJP is ruling Gujarat for the last 30 years and Hindutva politics is dominant. Latif was used in this.
Took advantage of Hindu Muslim riots between 1950-1995. There were 241 Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat in 45 years.
Uttar Pradesh is at second place with 199 points and Maharashtra is at second place with 187 points. There is BJP in all the states.
Hindu-Muslim riots in Gujarat recorded 120 deaths per 10 lakh urban population, the highest in the country. In Bihar this number was 80.
Riots were not the only reason behind increasing religious polarization in Gujarat.
Professor Christophe Zaffarello, in his book ‘Gujarat Under Modi: The Blueprint of Today’s India’, writes, “The Muslim mafia involved in bootlegging should also be considered a contributor. The illegal underground liquor trade flourished in pre-prohibition Gujarat. Police seizures were a boon for this trade.
Gangsters, mafia and liquor smugglers are already prominent in Gujarat politics. Mafia shootout happened around 1985.
Most of the street thugs and robbers in the state belonged to the Muslim community. The goons were harassing the common citizens, but the government did not take any action against them, because they had the protection of some Congress leaders and these goons were getting them votes. The relationship of these goons with the police also created a feeling in the minds of common Hindus that they are helpless against such elements coming from the Muslim community.
Latif was born in 1951 in a poor family in Ahmedabad. Latif was a member of Dawood Ibrahim gang. There were many cases against him ranging from smuggling, murder to kidnapping. His original business was smuggling of illicit liquor, from which he earned a lot.
Latif’s popularity increased in the years after 1980. At that time Congress was ruling Gujarat.
During the 1985 riots, he helped the poor people of the Muslim community by providing them essential food. Apart from this, many charitable works were also started.
For the Muslims of Ahmedabad, he was like a local Robin Hood. There was sympathy towards him among the Muslims.
The police, administration and to some extent even the government could not do anything.
The reach in Ahmedabad was so far that it could not even be imagined.
He won the municipal elections in Ahmedabad as an independent candidate from five wards.
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation elections were held in 1987. By then, Latif’s influence had increased so much that he filed independent candidature from five seats, Dariyapur, Kalupur, Danilimda, Jamalpur and Raikhad. He was in jail at that time.
Won all five seats. Then he vacated the remaining four seats as per rules.
BJP leaders also publicly criticized Latif and compromised with Latif and vacated seats which would benefit BJP.
BJP’s Bhamini Patel won in Kalupur and BJP’s Guruprasad Naidu won in Raikhad. Thus the number of BJP increased in the Municipal Corporation Board.
In this election, BJP was successful in gaining power in Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation for the first time.
The BJP used Latif’s political activism to help polarize Gujarat politics, at the expense of the Congress. Because many Muslims did not trust Congress either. This strategy was first tried in the 1987 municipal elections.
Because of him, BJP started defaming Latif and the entire community and tried to present the model of ‘Ramraj’ versus ‘Latifaraz’ in the elections. Many Hindus resented Latif’s candidacy and this was a major factor behind the BJP’s victory in the 1987 elections.
Election results are out and BJP has won 67 out of 127 seats in the Ahmedabad Corporation elections. Congress got 30 seats and JNP (Janata Party) got 26 seats.
People’s anger was increasing against the lax policy of Congress leaders in taking action against Latif. Congress leaders considered the action against Latif anti-Com, keeping in mind the Muslim vote. He failed to do the political math and failed to realize that this was alienating Hindu voters. Five-seven years ago in 1980, they had not even imagined that BJP would take advantage of this.
By the end of 1989, the BJP had made such inroads into urban areas that it even won the Surat, Rajkot and Vadodara Municipal Corporation elections.
During the communal riots in Ahmedabad, BJP’s allies Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal started building footpaths in Pol area and East Ahmedabad. BJP was directly benefiting from this.
Even BJP leaders did not believe that BJP would ever come to power. But the storm of 1985 and the mistakes of Congress were making him stronger.
At that time, common voters had the perception that BJP meant the party of Hindus and Congress meant the party of Muslims.
Many Congress leaders were also against Latif. The most opposition came from Congress MP Rauf Waliullah, who lives in Kalupur. this
The MP was also murdered by members of an underworld gang.
Congress leader and Home Minister
C. D. Patel was also displeased with Latif.
Following its success in 1987, the BJP began to further fuel this issue. It was also leveraged during the 1990 Legislative Assembly elections. The BJP secured 67 out of 182 seats; while it did not attain power, it did gain a share in governance.
This strategy was employed during the 1993 by-election for the Ellisbridge constituency in Ahmedabad. The BJP’s candidate was the ‘rising star’ Haren Pandya, and his election campaign was managed by Narendra Modi, who was then the organizational secretary of the Gujarat BJP.
The Congress fielded industrialist Lalchand Devchand against Haren Pandya. Chimanbhai Patel wanted to see Haren Pandya defeated in the election. Chimanbhai was close to Latif, and Narendra Modi had identified this as his ‘vulnerability.’
During the door-to-door election campaign, BJP workers would tell residents, “Don’t forget Latif when you go to vote.” In doing so, they reminded people of his illicit activities, extortion, and other such actions.
This seat had previously been held by the Janata Dal, and before that, by the Janata Party and the Congress. Haren Pandya won the by-election by a margin of 48,000 votes.
With this victory, the BJP seemingly discovered a new model for winning in Gujarat, and it continued to experiment further.
Latif contested the election as an independent candidate.
After Latif fled to Pakistan, Chhabildas Mehta of the Congress served as Chief Minister. The 1995 Legislative Assembly elections were approaching.
Some Congress leaders were adopting a firm stance against Latif, though these discussions took place behind closed doors. The general public perceived that the Congress was responsible for the hardships faced by Hindus in Ahmedabad and Gujarat. Meanwhile, a significant segment of the Muslim population was also distancing itself from the Congress. During the assembly election campaign, the BJP focused on the ties between Congress leaders and Latif.
Although the issue centered on Latif, the entire Muslim community was being held responsible, even if not explicitly stated. Hindus began to perceive the BJP as their sole savior in this situation. This was the first assembly election in which the BJP left a significant mark on the electorate.
In the 1995 elections, the BJP lacked any substantive issue—but they had Latif. They portrayed the Congress as “Latif’s party”—in other words, a party of Muslims.
By the time of the 1995 elections, Latif had become a fugitive and had fled to Pakistan.
No election speech by a BJP leader was complete without mentioning Latif, Dawood Ibrahim, and their alleged connections to the Congress.
Abdul Latif laid the groundwork for the BJP’s rise to power in Gujarat.
From 1984 onwards, conditions in Gujarat had become increasingly favorable for the Sangh Parivar. Anti-reservation protests morphed into anti-Muslim violence. Traditional Congress voters began shifting toward the BJP. Following the BJP’s victory in 1995, the Sangh Parivar intensified its agenda of communalization and “saffronization.” Consequently, a large segment of the population—such as the Patels—aligned themselves with the BJP.
Events such as the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, Advani’s *Rath Yatra*, the plight of Kashmiri Pandits, the demolition of the Babri Masjid (and the subsequent riots), and the rise of figures like Abdul Latif—a member of the Muslim underworld—in cities like Ahmedabad, pushed a significant portion of those who had previously held secular views toward the Hindu majority. This had a profound and lasting impact on the political landscape.
In the 1995 elections, the BJP secured a resounding victory, winning 121 seats, while the Congress was reduced to just 45. Within five years, Narendra Modi raised the Ram Janmabhoomi issue and, by campaigning against Latif, effectively wiped out the Congress. This was his first major experiment, and it proved successful.
In 1996, when Keshubhai Patel had Latif arrested, the BJP—across several districts—hailed him as the ‘Hindu Hriday Samrat’ (Emperor of Hindu Hearts).
The government formed under the shadow of the ‘Latif factor’ did not last long; internal rebellion within the BJP led to Shankersinh Vaghela coming to power.
In November 1997, during the tenure of an RJD-Congress coalition government, Latif was killed in an alleged police encounter.
Latif created a chasm between Hindus and Muslims in Ahmedabad that remained unbridged for a century. Political parties played a significant role in widening this divide.
Although Latif died in 1997, as long as his gang remained active, the BJP continued to leverage the politics of fear to divide Gujarati society along communal lines.
Communal polarization in Gujarat was one of the key factors behind the BJP’s assembly election victories in the 1990s.
Without Latif, the BJP would not have become as strong as it did in Gujarat.
In the years following 1985, the BJP skillfully steered the anti-reservation movement to its own advantage. The promotion of figures like Latif contributed to riots in Gujarat, which resulted in losses for both sides.
Latif was not present during the horrific riots of 1969, nor was he involved in the 2002 riots.
At various points, Latif served the interests of both the BJP and the Congress; both parties utilized him at different times.
Despite Hindus being in the majority, an atmosphere was cultivated in which they were made to feel fearful and under threat. Therefore, even if Latif benefited the Congress, he benefited the BJP even more. The BJP has accomplished the seemingly impossible in Gujarat.
At that time, the BJP needed a symbol that could resonate with the people. Ahmedabad was then plagued by constant riots.
The success gained through Latif was part of their well-defined propaganda machinery.
A meeting held in Dariyapur, Ahmedabad, on April 21, 2026.
Deputy Chief Minister Harsh Sanghavi reminded the people of Latif. Under Congress rule, this city was known as ‘Latif’s city.’ Under BJP rule—whether it concerns Latif…
Latif’s grandfather—and everyone else—was brought back home. That was the announcement made.
In 2026, the BJP lost in Khadia, a constituency it had held for four decades.
After Latif’s death, the political mileage gained from his name diminished, and subsequently, Narendra Modi became Chief Minister. In later campaigns, Modi sidelined the ‘Latif’ narrative, shifting the focus instead to ‘Miyan Musharraf’ and ‘Pakistan.’ Latif gradually faded into irrelevance; he has now become a thing of the distant past. The BJP no longer has any need for such tactics—it has plenty of other tools at its disposal.
Today, the BJP is leveraging the Hindu community itself to consolidate power. The Ram Mandir has been built, but the underlying motives—revealed through various controversies—have exposed the insatiable hunger for power within the BJP, the RSS, the Vishva Hindu Parishad, and the Bajrang Dal.
Issues like Latif and the Ram Mandir are being raised solely for the sake of attaining power.
A report based on an article by journalist Arjav Parekh. Courtesy: BBC. Originally published: August 22, 2026 (Translated from Gujarati via Google Translate).
