WASHINGTON  - The United States has insisted there was "no change" in Washington's policy of denying entry visa to Narendra Modi, Bharatiya Janata Party's prime ministerial candidate, even though the American Ambassador to India, Nancy Powell, ending a 10-year diplomatic boycott imposed on the Hindu nationalist leader,  will meet him this week.
"There has been no change in our longstanding visa policy. When individuals apply for a visa, their applications are reviewed in accordance with US law and policy," State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki said in response to reporters' questions whether the American envoy's upcoming meeting represented a policy shift towards Modi, whose alleged involvement in the 2002 massacre of Muslims in Gujarat led to Western moves to isolate him.
"This is not a reflection of any change. As you know, we don’t speak to that. This is simply a meeting happening on the ground in India. It’s not a reflection of anything else than outreach to a broad range of officials," Psaki said.
The boycott of Modi follows charges that, when chief minister in 2002, he allowed or even encouraged mobs to attack Muslims in towns across Gujarat after a lethal fire on a train full of Hindu pilgrims. More than two thousand people died in the violence and many more were forced from their homes. 
The Gujarat riots led to a de facto travel ban imposed on Modi by the the US, the UK and some European nations, as well as the boycott by senior officials. In 2005, Modi was refused a US visa as someone held responsible for a serious violation of religious freedom.
Under close questioning, the State Department spokesperson suggested that despite Ambassador Powell’s plans to meet Modi in Gujarat, the US was holding firm to its decision to deny Modi an entry visa.
At that time the State Department refused to issue Modi a diplomatic visa under 214(b) of the US Immigration and Nationality Act and revoked his existing tourist/business visa under Section 212 (a)(2)(g) of the Act, an action linked to concerns about his involvement with the anti-Muslim riots.
Asked why the US had decided to have its officials Modi after a 10-year hiatus, Psaki said, “We are often engaged in concentrated outreach to senior political and business leaders. We began doing that months ago, if not years ago… to highlight and continue our US-India relationship. This is an effort in that engagement.”
The spokesperson also denied that its ambassador's meeting Modi scarcely a few months before India holds general elections was any indication that it was taking a position on Indian politics.
Pressed on this Psaki said, “We don’t take positions in elections, and certainly this is not an example of us taking a position. It is just a reflection… of us reaching out to a range of individuals from different backgrounds [and] political affiliations, which we do in countries around the world.”
The official refuted any notion that the meeting linked the US to human rights violations or curtailment of religious freedoms. However she explained that decisions to hold such meetings “don’t always rise up to every highest level,” even if on this occasion “All relevant individuals who needed to weigh in weighed in, and agreed that it was certainly an appropriate meeting to have.”
The Overseas Friends of BJP (OFBJP)-US president Chandrakant Patel welcomed the decision taken by the Obama Administration in this regard."We highly appreciate the decision taken by US President Barack Obama, and Secretary of State John Kerry. This would further help in strengthening of Indo-US relationship," Patel said. "Modi is the most popular leader of the country right now. Given that he has been given clean shit by all the courts in India, it was not fair on the part of the US to not to have relationship with Modi," Patel said.