Seriosuly, what a nonsense.... He was a good ruler because he had conquered and was ruling India instead of Britishers who conquered and ruled India... He was converting people to Islam without there consent rather than Britishers using missionaries to do so.... Atleast in British rule, someone was answerable to some higher power, though it may not have helped many and most Indians but still there wasnt an autocrat rule of a King who killed his brother just cause he was interested in Hinduism...
