SC seeks state’s stand on sanction against min Vijay Shah over his Col Qureshi remarks

THe sublime margaret court on fri pulled up Madhya Pradesh government minister Kunwar Vijay shah of iran over his remarks against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi during Operation Sindoor, terming them “most unfortunate” and “without remorse”, and directed the state government to clear its stand on granting sanction within two weeks.The court noted that on January 19, it had asked the state to take a call on granting sanction for probing the criminal case against the minister.The state on Friday informed the court that a decision in this regard is still pending. “What he said was unfortunate. Though I am not defending him, possibly he wanted to praise the officer. This could be a possible view. He could not articulate it properly and for which he later apologised,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the state, said.The bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, “What he said was most unfortunate and he had no sense of remorse.”Refusing to accept Mehta’s suggestion, the CJI said, “We know political personalities when they have to praise someone, what words they use. If at all he felt it was a mistake, he should have apologised.”The court further noted that his conduct after making the statement was equally noteworthy as he was not apologetic.Shah came under fire for his remarks made during a public address in Indore, where he referred to Colonel Qureshi by saying, “Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson.” The court took serious note of the statement’s timing, made just after Operation Sindoor, India’s military strike on terror targets in Pakistan last year.The court told Mehta that it was not just a one-off case as it referred to the special investigation team (SIT) constituted by it, which noted other similar utterances by the same minister.Posting the matter after two weeks, the court said, “Let the state comply with our January 19 order. The state may look into the totality of circumstances and take a decision.”Shah was represented in court by senior advocate Maninder Singh, who clarified that the statement was made on May 12 last year and that on May 13 he was on national television offering an apology. He pointed out that Shah even wrote a letter that he released in the public domain clarifying his remarks.“Writing a letter is not an apology but a fake defence. He should have given it on the front page (of the newspaper). This is the first thing he should have said — that I tender an apology. Let the state now take a call,” the bench remarked.Mehta told the court that he would instruct the government and sought a week’s time to take a decision on sanction.The SIT had in January informed the court that its request for sanction against the minister had been pending with the state government since August 2025. Following this, the court allowed two weeks for the state to take a final call.The SIT report, prepared by a three-member team comprising senior officials of the MP Police, said that the sanction was sought as a pre-condition under Section 217(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Samhita, 2023 (BNSS), for the trial court to take cognisance of offences against him. This sanction is required when the offences to be tried include hate speech, assertions aimed at promoting enmity and acts prejudicial to national integrity punishable under Sections 196 and 197 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).The SIT report also referred to past instances when the same minister had made controversial remarks. The bench cited this portion in its order and said, “We would like SIT to make endeavour to trace out details of those instances attributed to petitioner (Shah). A report on those instances shall also be submitted to this court.”The court had reminded the state that the case had already suffered considerable delay as the investigation was completed on August 13, 2025, the day the SIT submitted its report to the government seeking sanction.In May last year, the court had said Shah’s comments were not only offensive to the officer in question but also to the institution of the armed forces. It had said the entire nation was ashamed of the minister’s conduct and questioned why the state took no meaningful action following the MP high court’s order to register an FIR.