I don't like Modi. But he was legitimately elected Chief Minister of Gujarat.
They say, the basis of the denial of the visa by the US to Modi is supposedly, the NHRC report, the letter written by Congressman Joe Pitts to Condoleeza Rice and Section 212(a)(2)(G) of the US Immigration and Nationality Act, which prohibits the admission to the United States of any foreign government official responsible for serious violations of religion freedom.
It says that: 'Any alien who, while serving as a foreign government official, was responsible for or directly carried out, at any time during the preceding 24-month period, particularly severe violations of religious freedom, as defined in section 3 of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, and the spouse and children, if any, are inadmissible.'
Even if Modi were guilty as charged, US law does not debar him from securing a visa because more than 24 months have passed since the Godhra massacre and subsequent riots in Gujarat.
And religious freedom? A comment on rediff.com read, "We have heard American presidents and their officials rudely rubbish citizens' reports and media exposes as unfair indictment of those who rule the USA. Just because American soldiers have murdered, raped and ****aged in My Lai, scorched people and their land in Vietnam with napalm, indulged in ghastly torture and denial of human dignity at Abu Ghreib; simply because CIA operatives have subverted democracy in Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala; merely because the US State Department has propped up Augusto Pinochet in Chile, Fulgencio Batists in Cuba, Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines and a succession of killer generals in Pakistan; and, only because US foreign policy has fathered monsters like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the commander-in-chief of the US army, the president of the USA, cannot be held responsible." The US is one to talk.
The only body authorised to find Modi guilty or clear him is the Justices Nanavati-Shah Commission of Inquiry, which has yet to submit it's report. As for the NHRC report, which isn't legally binding as opposed to the Justices Nanavati-Shah Commission of Inquiry report, it's a bit much that the US usually chooses to ignore reports on Pakistan's active involvement in promoting cross-border terrorism that violates the human rights of Indians.
In any case, if there was sincerity in it's claims as a defender of human rights, the US would have denied entry to a lot of other people, especially from the oil-rich Middle-East. And yet the Saudis are buddy-buddies with the US.
Last year, the publication of the US State Department Report on Human Rights (their annual number on the records of countries around the world) was delayed. Guess why? They were too embarrassed. You see the photos from Abu Ghraib had just been published.