The party shifted to a moderate agenda in the 90s. Funnily enough, this party has been working with Modi's Hindutva party or BJP.
In comparison, J&K demands were raised by a party called National Conference. This party has never shifted its agenda and continued with demand for sometimes separatism and sometimes special status for J&K.
Politics runs on supporting specific agendas. J&K agenda is still supported. No one denies that. You will not find any Indian sources claiming that. While there is no popular party supporting the Khalistani agenda. So, Indian sources claim that.
While there are parties in Canada supporting and pushing this. So, you'd surely find facts in the international media saying there is support.
It is pretty much clear how India is perceived from your comments. Someone who is doesn't know Indian laws but trying to make assured judgments about India's justice system and telling people how they should approach situations.
At least that is how things are perceived in India. Racist or not. That is the line which is being toed by Modi.
Consider this - If this whole situation was such a perceived issue, India wouldn't have taken this strong stance. If these online angry people were the majority - India wouldn't have taken this stance.
As for the whole Modi's Hindutva agenda, no one seems to ask a basic question - Why does his populist movement which apparently is so hated online, I mean even Trump's right wing agenda isn't hated as much, is so successful? He won the elections. Twice. Not even Trump's right wingers could do that. Why do the majority still side with him?
> It is genuinely impossible to find any information except from biased sources screaming that Sikhs don't want it.
>I made an assumption and it might be flawed. I would love to find some concrete data.
These two together don't compute. You obviously have a tilt that anything coming out of India is "biased source" while international one is unbiased somehow. So, why even pretend that you want some concrete data.
And that basically is the issue. Indian evidence, data and proofs are treated with suspicion. While Western data is somehow clean. If this is not a classist mindset I don't know what is.
> India should have plenty of evidence to be able to charge him, try him, and convict him in absentia, then demand Canada extradite him. That they haven't done so is a strong hint that they don't have enough evidence that would hold up in a modern justice system.
You really need to read up on Indian laws and history. In absentia conviction isn't a thing in Indian law.
But this is just smoke and mirrors. People in the West don't care for Indian legal system. Because "freedom of expression", "Hindu nationalists" and what not. So, this isn't going to help anyways.
> The quirk here is that India and many Hindu nationals disagree that this is all he was doing, and they instead basically brand him as something closer to a terrorist responsible for murders.
It seems you are ignorant of the history behind this issue. The Khalistan movement wanted to stay in India and get special status (like J&K did which was removed later). If these powers were not granted then they wanted to secede. The Union of India happened with a lot of effort. Nearly everyone wanted a special status (and politically there are still fights for special status of different kind but no one threatens to secede). Even J&K special status nearly fractured the ruling party (Congress which is not "Hindu nationalist party" as per today's Western agenda) with many leaders refusing to be part of it. Khalistan had no chance and wasn't granted that exception too. They took to arms and captured the Golden temple.
It was the Congress leader which had ordered an army attack on the Sikh sacred ground - The Golden Temple in Amristar. When the Air India bombing happened, even then Congress was in charge.
The larger point is that West is ignorant of India's concerns. Previously, it was an issue of "botched" investigation and Indian justice and legal system. Now the garb is "Hindu nationalists".
At the end there is always some story about "freedom of expression" as well. It is nothing new.