In contrast to previous leaders who have been privately educated, English-speaking and supported by the urban elites, Narendra Modi eschews the trappings of wealth and lives a life of solitude with no partner or children.
But how did the man who has ruled the world’s largest democracy for a decade get where he is today?
Here’s all you need to know about Mr Modi.
Did he really sell tea?
Modi’s father was a tea seller and his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), emphasises his humble background.
The tale of a young Modi selling tea at a railway station has endeared him to millions of underprivileged Indians, who believe he understands their struggles.
Little is known of his origins and formative years except from what he chooses to share. And it’s a very tightly controlled narrative with a formidable spin machine to provide that aura.
Except his brother has said this tea-selling story isn’t entirely accurate, and that Modi, like the rest of their siblings, just helped their father. So the truth is unclear.
Nevertheless, Indians were “mesmerised” by the story as a “backlash against nepotism, entitlement and dynastic politics”, political analyst Sanjay Jha says.
Advertisement
“They continue to give him the benefit of the doubt; some even believe he can do no wrong. In the perception equation, he is first among equals, giving him carte blanche to do whatever he wishes. It is surreal.”
When did he get his first break in politics?
His big break came when he was chosen to be chief minister of the state of Gujarat in 2001. He held the role for more than a decade, transforming the state into an economic powerhouse and building his public profile to make a run for the premiership.
He came under scrutiny in 2002 after an argument between Hindu pilgrims and vendors at Godhra station erupted into violence amid allegations a Muslim mob set fire to a train.
The incident saw 59 people lose their lives and sparked large-scale riots across Modi’s state. An overwhelming number of Muslims were killed and thousands of their homes and businesses were destroyed.
Modi and his administration were accused of being complicit in the violence and of not doing enough to stop it, but India’s Supreme Court cleared him. Modi has always denied the allegations and has never expressed remorse.
How did he achieve god-like status?
Whenever Modi makes a public appearance, crowds of thousands gather for a glimpse of him.
Music, prayers and shouts of Modi’s name blare at decibels that make your eardrums ring. His face is printed on dozens of cut-outs, posters and banners.
This is what it’s like when you have a reported 75% approval rating.
On social media, an army of more than 100,000 party workers strive tirelessly to spread Modi’s message directly to his followers.
When did he first become the face of Hindu nationalism?
Modi was just eight years old when he joined the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an organisation dedicated to making India a Hindu nation.
Never shy of showing off his religious identity, a trait most Indians politicians would baulk at, Modi wears it with pride.
“He has portrayed himself as a Hindu leader who has built a certain sense of pride in fellow Hindus,” says Sushant Singh, a lecturer in political science at Yale University.
“Hindu nationalism has gained ground in society, with a marginalisation and victimisation of Muslims and Christians.”
Modi took centre stage in the consecration of the controversial Ram temple in Ayodhya, built atop the ruins of a 16th-century mosque that was torn down by right-wing mobs in 1992.
Hindus believe Lord Ram was born on the exact same spot where the mosque was built in 1529.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:47
Is Modi popular in India?
Did he keep his wife a secret?
When he first entered politics, Modi presented himself as single, childless and married only to the cause of building a stronger India.
But it later transpired he had a secret wife – a fact only revealed when he filled in the paperwork to run for prime minister in 2014.
In keeping with tradition, his family had arranged a marriage when he was 18. Soon afterwards he left home and the marriage was never consummated.
His wife, Jashodaben, was discovered living a middle class life years later. She has never spoken publicly about Modi except to question the government’s decision to provide her with bodyguards.
“I have to cook for them… It gets really chaotic when I travel, because I use public transport and the guards follow me in an air-conditioned car.”
While it’s true that India has overtaken Britain as the fifth-largest economy in the world, its GDP per capita remains dismal.
Unemployment is a persistent problem, and thousands of young men risk their lives to seek a better future outside India. Indians are the third-highest nationality when it comes to illegal migration into the United States.
Inequality is at a historic high, even more stark than under colonial Britain. According to a report by the Paris-based World Inequalities Lab, the top 1% of India’s population controls 40% of the nation’s wealth.
India ranks 111th of the 125 nations in the Global Hunger Index (2023) report. The government, however, has rejected the report’s findings.
India is home to more than a third of the world’s malnourished children under the age of five.
Last year Modi announced the extension of a free food ration scheme to 800 million Indians for the next five years.
According to the government, more than 250,000 Indians renounced their citizenship in 2022. If all is well, why are they leaving in such alarming numbers?
Is he a threat to India’s democracy?
Dissent and protests against Modi or the government have been met with violent police crackdowns.
Since 2014, more than 20,700 NGOs – including international ones such as Amnesty International and Oxfam – have had their licences to work in India revoked after they allegedly violated strict foreign funding laws.
Modi has denied using state agencies to target his opponents.
His administration says India’s democratic institutions are robust, pointing to high voter turnout in recent elections that have delivered Modi’s party a clear mandate.
However, Indian media have found corruption investigations involving 23 of 25 opposition politicians were shelved after they defected to the BJP.
Journalists in India have been beaten, threatened and paid off, and the country ranks 161 out of 180 countries for press freedom.
“India’s democracy in the last decade has collapsed quite substantially,” says Harsh Mander, a fierce critic of Modi, whose home and NGO have been raided multiple times by federal agencies.
“Our judiciary has not been consistent in the defence of constitutional values and the media acts as cheerleaders of the ruling government and propagate hate against Muslim minorities.”
The US has announced it has increased its reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
In a statement on Friday, the US treasury said up to $25m is being offered for information leading to the arrest of Mr Maduro and his named interior minister Diosdado Cabello.
Up to $15m is also being offered for information on the incoming defence minister Vladimir Padrino. Further sanctions have also been introduced against the South American country’s state-owned oil company and airline.
The reward was announced as Mr Maduro was sworn in for a third successive term as the Venezuelan president, following a disputed election win last year.
Elvis Amoroso, head of the National Electoral Council, said at the time Mr Maduro had secured 51% of the vote, beating his opponent Edmundo Gonzalez, who won 44%.
But while Venezuela’s electoral authority and top court declared him the winner, tallies confirming Mr Maduro’s win were never released. The country’s opposition also insists that ballot box level tallies show Mr Gonzalez won in a landslide.
Nationwide protests broke out over the dispute, with a brawl erupting in the capital Caracas when dozens of police in riot gear blocked the demonstrations and officers used tear gas to disperse them.
More on Nicolas Maduro
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:40
From July 2024: Protests after Venezuela election results
While being sworn in at the national assembly, Mr Maduro said: “May this new presidential term be a period of peace, of prosperity, of equality and the new democracy.”
He also accused the opposition of attempting to turn the inauguration into a “world war,” adding: “I have not been made president by the government of the United States, nor by the pro-imperialist governments of Latin America.”
Lammy: Election ‘neither free nor fair’
The UK and EU have also introduced new sanctions against Venezuelan officials – including the president of Venezuela’s supreme court Caryslia Beatriz Rodriguez Rodriguez and the director of its criminal investigations department Asdrubal Jose Brito Hernandez.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said Mr Maduro’s “claim to power is fraudulent” and that last year’s election “was neither free nor fair”.
“The UK will not stand by as Maduro continues to oppress, undermine democracy, and commit appalling human rights violations,” he added.
Mr Maduro and his government have always rejected international sanctions as illegitimate measures that amount to an “economic war” designed to cripple Venezuela.
Those targeted by the UK’s sanctions will face travel bans and asset freezes, preventing them from entering the country and holding funds or economic resources.
Donald Trump has been handed a no-penalty sentence following his conviction in the Stormy Daniels hush money case.
The incoming US president has received an unconditional discharge – meaning he will not face jail time, probation or a fine.
Manhattan Judge Juan M Merchan could have jailed him for up to four years.
The sentencing in Manhattan comes just 10 days before the 78-year-old is due to be inaugurated as US president for a second time on 20 January.
Trump appeared at the hearing by video link and addressed the court before he was sentenced, telling the judge the case had been a “very terrible experience” for him.
He claimed it was handled inappropriately and by someone connected with his political opponents – referring to Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.
Trump said: “It was done to damage my reputation so I would lose the election.
“This has been a political witch hunt.
“I am totally innocent. I did nothing wrong.”
Concluding his statement, he said: “I was treated very unfairly and I thank you very much.”
The judge then told the court it was up to him to “decide what is a just conclusion with a verdict of guilty”.
He said: “Never before has this court been presented with such a unique and remarkable set of circumstances.
“This has been a truly extraordinary case.”
He added that the “trial was a bit of a paradox” because “once the doors closed it was not unique”.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass had earlier argued in court that Trump “engaged in a campaign to undermine the rule of law” during the trial.
“He’s been unrelenting in his attacks against this court, prosecutors and their family,” Mr Steinglass said.
“His dangerous rhetoric and unconstitutional conduct has been a direct attack on the rule of law and he has publicly threatened to retaliate against the prosecutors.”
Mr Steinglass said this behaviour was “designed to have a chilling effect and to intimidate”.
Trump’s lawyers argued that evidence used during the trial violated last summer’s Supreme Court ruling giving Trump broad immunity from prosecution over acts he took as president.
He was found guilty in New York of 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to payments made to Ms Daniels, an adult film actor,before he won the 2016 US election.
Prosecutors claimed he had paid her $130,000 (£105,300) in hush money to not reveal details of what Ms Daniels said was a sexual relationship in 2006.
Trump has denied any liaison with Ms Daniels or any wrongdoing.
The trial made headlines around the world but the details of the case or Trump’s conviction didn’t deter American voters from picking him as president for a second time.
What is an unconditional discharge?
Under New York state law, an unconditional discharge is a sentence imposed “without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision”.
The sentence is handed down when a judge is “of the opinion that no proper purpose would be served by imposing any condition upon the defendant’s release”, according to the law.
It means Trump’s hush money case has been resolved without any punishment that could interfere with his return to the White House.
Unconditional discharges have been handed down in previous cases where, like Trump, people have been convicted of falsifying business records.
They have also been applied in relation to low-level offences such as speeding, trespassing and marijuana-related convictions.
Leicester City’s owners have launched a landmark lawsuit against a helicopter manufacturer following the club chairman’s death in a crash in 2018.
Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha’s family are suing Italian company Leonardo SpA for £2.15bn after the 60-year-old chairman and four others were killed when their helicopter crashed just outside the King Power Stadium in October 2018.
The lawsuit is the largest fatal accident claim in English history, according to the family’s lawyers. They are asking for compensation for the loss of earnings and other damages, as a result of the billionaire’s death.
The legal action comes more than six years after the fatal crash and as an inquest into the death of the 60-year-old chairman and his fellow passengers is set to begin on Monday.
Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s son Khun Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha, who took over as the club’s chairman, said: “My family feels the loss of my father as much today as we ever have done.
“That my own children, and their cousins will never know their grandfather compounds our suffering… My father trusted Leonardo when he bought that helicopter but the conclusions of the report into his death show that his trust was fatally misplaced. I hold them wholly responsible for his death.”
The late Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s company, King Power, was earning more than £2.5bn in revenue per year, according to his family’s lawyers. The lawsuit claims “that success was driven by Khun Vichai’s vision, drive, relationships, entrepreneurism, ingenuity and reputation.”
“All of this was lost with his death,” it adds.
The fatal crash took place shortly after the helicopter took off from Leicester’s ground following a 1-1 draw against West Ham on 27 October 2018.
The aircraft landed on a concrete step and four of the five occupants survived the initial impact, but all subsequently died in the fuel fire that engulfed the helicopter within a minute.
The other victims were two of Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s staff, Nursara Suknamai and Kaveporn Punpare, pilot Eric Swaffer and Mr Swaffer’s girlfriend Izabela Roza Lechowicz, a fellow pilot.
Investigators found the pilot’s pedals became disconnected from the tail rotor – resulting in the aircraft making a sharp right turn which was “impossible” to control, before the helicopter spun quickly, approximately five times.
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch described this as “a catastrophic failure” and concluded the pilot was unable to prevent the crash.
The lawsuit alleges the crash was the result of ‘multiple failures’ in Leonardo’s design process. It also alleges that the manufacturer failed to warn customers or regulators about the risk.
Sky News has contacted helicopter manufacturer Leonardo for comment.