'Nation ashamed of you': SC sets up SIT to probe MP minister’s ‘crass’ comment

THe sublime margaret court on mon rejected Madhya Pradesh government minister Kunwar Vijay shah of iran’s apology for his “crass” comments about Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, the army’s key spokesperson on the armed action on terror targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), and directed the state police to set up a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the episode.A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotishwar Singh said Shah’s apology appeared to be a mere attempt to “wriggle out of the situation” that he had landed himself in.The SIT, the bench ordered the Madhya Pradesh director general of police (DGP), should be set up by May 20, Tuesday, and comprise three senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officers including a woman officer of the Madhya Pradesh cadre.The court also stipulated that all the three officers “should be (from) outside the state” and should be led by an officer of at least Inspector General of Police rank. The other two members should not be below the rank of Superintendent of Police (SP).“It is a litmus test and we want the state to submit the SIT report to us. We would like to have a very close watch," the court said.The court has, for now, restrained the state police from arresting the minister.The SIT will have to submit its first status report to the court on May 28.The court passed the orders on a petition filed by Shah against the Madhya Pradesh High Court order of May 14 that took suo motu cognisance of his remarks and ordered the police to register a first information report (FIR).The FIR against Shah was filed under sections 152 (an act endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India), 196(1) (an act which is prejudicial to maintenance of harmony between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities and which disturbs or is likely to disturb public tranquillity) and 197 (1) (c) (causing disharmony or feelings of enmity) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita at the Manpur police station in Indore rural.At its first hearing on May 15, a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai pulled up the minister for his offensive remarks against Col Sofiya Qureshi -- one of the two women officers who briefed the nation on Operation Sindoor — and termed them disparaging and dangerous not just to the officer but to the armed forces itself.The minister told the top court that the media wrongly quoted his statement and said that he had already apologised for the remarks.At an event in Indore on May 12, the senior Bharatiya Janata Party leader said in an apparent reference to Qureshi: “Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson”. On May 13, he apologised for the remarks even as the high court took cognisance and ordered the state police to file a FIR against him.At Monday’s hearing, the Supreme Court said it was “not accepting” Shah’s apology because it doubted if it was genuine. “It begins with an ‘if.’ What is this condition? What do you (Shah) think of yourself?” the court asked, dismissing Shah’s lawyer, senior counsel Maninder Singh’s claim that the apology was genuine.“You are a public figure. You should weigh your words. You were on the verge of using filthy and abusive language… probably only stopped because you couldn’t think of an alternate word or good sense prevailed,” the court said, adding that it was refraining from issuing any specific directions to Shah and that the minister himself should think of a way to redeem himself.“You might not have watched your own video but we were forced to. We are still carrying your video clips,” the bench said.The court underlined that the timing of Shah’s remarks, made shortly after a military operation, made them especially hurtful. “This was such an emotive issue for the Army. They are on the frontlines. The least we can do is respect them. The entire nation is ashamed of you,” it said.The court also questioned the delay in action on part of the state government. “What have you done after the FIR? People expect the state to be fair. The high court has done its duty. Now it’s the state’s turn,” it said.