New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday expressed sharp disapproval of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and Madhya Pradesh minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his “thoughtless”, “filthy”, “crass” and “shameful” comments against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, ordering the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the FIR registered against him.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh rejected Shah’s public apology, calling it insincere and an “attempt to wriggle out of the legal liability”.
“The kind of crass comments you made, completely thoughtlessly. What prevented you from making a sincere attempt? We don’t require your apology. We know how to deal with it as per the law,” Justice Kant said.
However, the bench gave relief to Shah by staying his arrest, subject to him assisting the SIT in its probe. The state Director General of Police has been directed to constitute the SIT by 10 am Tuesday, and include three IPS officers of Madhya Pradesh cadre serving outside the state, including a woman police officer.
The apex court was hearing Shah’s appeal against two orders of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which had taken suo-motu cognisance of the MLA’s remarks against Qureshi, who had briefed the media about India’s Operation Sindoor and escalating tensions with Pakistan this month. The high court had ordered the state police to register an FIR against Shah, and later directed it to amend it, after observing that the FIR had been worded to ensure it got quashed in future.
While issuing notice on Shah’s appeal Monday, the Supreme Court bench ordered: “Having gone through the statements by the petitioner and the FIR, we are of the opinion that the subject FIR shall be probed by a SIT with three senior IPS officers… Let the SIT be constituted by tomorrow. Let one member be a woman officer. Both members shall be above the rank of superintendent of police. The head member shall not be below the rank of IG or DGP. Let the petitioner co-operate. As of now, his arrest shall remain stayed.”
Though the court clarified it is not inclined to monitor the probe, but in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the bench said it would like to have a very close watch. Saying that the case is a litmus test, the bench asked the SIT to submit the status report to it. The matter will now be taken up in the first week of vacation—between 26 May and 1 June.
During the hearing, the bench rebuked Shah multiple times, refusing to pay heed to his lawyer senior advocate Maninder Singh’s explanation on his apology and the background in which the remark was made.
The bench orally noted that Shah is a public figure and should have been wise enough to own up to his actions. After the order was dictated, the bench said that the entire nation was ashamed of his comments.
“Meanwhile, you think how you will redeem yourself…the entire nation is ashamed of…we are a country that firmly believes in rule of law…,” Justice Kant said, pulling up the state minister for being an “irresponsible” public figure.
“You are a seasoned politician. You should weigh your words when you speak,” the bench observed. “We should display your video here…media people are not going into depth of your video…you were at a stage where you were going to use abusive language, very filthy language…but something prevailed on you and you stopped. This is an important issue for the Armed Forces. We need to be very responsible,” Justice Kant said.
The bench then questioned the State for its inaction: “What have you done? When HC had to intervene and re-write your FIR, what have you done? Has it been examined if any cognisable offense is made out? People expect State action will be fair. HC has done its duty, they thought suo motu action was needed. You should have done something more by now.”
Shah had spurred a row, drawing flak for making a reference to Colonel Qureshi’s religion by saying, “Those who widowed our daughters…we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson.”
On 14 May, the Madhya Pradesh High Court had initiated a suo-motu case against Shah, ordering the registration of a criminal case against him. “His comments are disparaging and dangerous, not just to the officer in question, but to the armed forces itself,” the high court had said last week. A day later, the high court had slammed the State for drafting the FIR in a manner that it could be quashed for not explicitly mentioning the actions of the accused.
(Edited by Mannat Chugh)
Also Read: Sexist jibes to communal remarks, the many controversies of MP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah
Given the unique power of the Supreme Court and how much this sentiment has permeated through our society to occasionally make an example of unacceptable conduct. A message that will resonate throughout the country. Occasionally even taking up some cases suo motto.