Sardar Patel, his biographer Rajmohan Gandhi claims was the Hindu face in the Pre Independent Congress while Nehru represented the moderate, universal face. Both of them co-existed under the moral umbrella of Gadhiji. Sardar together with Babu Rajendra Prasad was for building the Somnath Temple using state resources which Nehru objected. Later on the temple was built using voluntary donations. People claim that during the riots that followed partition. Patel as Home Minister protected lives of Muslims inthe capital despite having a soft corner for Hindu brethern. Patel was the conduit between RSS which was banned following the assasination oif Mahatma and the Congress party. Articles have been written by AG Noorani and Vidhya Subramanian of late on the efforts that Patel took to get the ban lifted, taking undertakings from RSS not to indulge in politics. This soft corner for those advocating militant Hindutva, has emboldened people like Modi to claim patent rights over his legacy. But History has proved it otherwise. Nehru has reportedly been keen to relinquish his post suggesting Patel take it up instead which was declined by Patel. Patel and Nehru despite all their differences, took up on their stride their personal egoes and worked together for the nation. It is true that Congress Party failed to adequately recognise Patel- bestowing the Bharat Ratna together wiuth Rajiv Gandhi many years later.  But that does not in any belittle Patel's contribution to an unified India.

Sardar Patel belonged to a different era. Modi was not even born when India attained freedom. To claim Sardar's legacy is no mean task. Even Advani failed to get this rough and tough image because under his Stewardship of Home Ministry Parliament attack happened, Terrorists were exchanged for saving lives of hostages at Kandaharr. Even earlier, when VP singh was ruling Mufi Mohammad Sayeed as Home Minister released dreaded terrorists to seek the release of Rubiya Sayeed his abducted daughter. That time BJP and RSS were silent on the compromise on national security which they time and again wax eloquent.