Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, May 19: The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the apology tendered by Madhya Pradesh Tribal Welfare Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his remarks on Colonel Sofiya Qureshi as “only a pretence to wriggle out of the consequences” and ordered the setting up of a 3-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the FIR filed against him over the issue.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N K Singh was hearing petitions filed by Shah challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s suo motu order directing the registration of an FIR against him for the alleged remarks addressing Colonel Sofiya, who briefed the media during Operation Sindoor, as “sister of terrorists.”
“Having gone through the contents of the statement attributed to the petitioner, also the contents of the apology said to have been tendered by him, we are satisfied that subject FIR requires to be investigated by an SIT comprising three senior, directly recruited IPS officers of MP cadre but who do not belong to the state,” the bench directed.
One of the members be a woman. The SIT must be headed by an IPS officer of Inspector General rank and the other two members must be of SP rank. The SIT must be formed by May 20 10 a.m., the apex court said. The Bench also directed the SIT to submit its findings in a status report to it. The court has fixed the next hearing on May 28.
Justice Kant said the Minister’s comments amounted to “crass, thoughtless remarks.” The court said there was no point apologising to the court merely to “wriggle out of a situation.” Justice Kant said the Bench had viewed the video clips showing Mr Shah making the remarks, and had even carried the clips to the court.
“If you want we can show them to you here… You seemed to be in the video on the verge of uttering some very filthy, abusive words, but either better sense prevailed for you or you probably did not get the right word and you stopped… Instead of leading by example, you, a public figure and a politician of experience do this most unfortunate thing,” Justice Kant addressed senior advocates Maninder Singh and Vibha Dutta Makhija, who appeared for Mr Shah.
The court said the Minister had ample time to reach out to the public and apologise sincerely. “The sentiments of the people were ruthlessly hurt by your comments. You should have done or said something to convey your sincere regret,” Justice Kant said. Justice Kant said a fair and transparent SIT investigation against a sitting Minister would be a “litmus test” for the BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh government.
The court directed Mr Shah to “to join and fully cooperate with the investigation” subject to which his arrest would remain stayed for the time being.
The court further questioned the lack of initiative shown by the State of Madhya Pradesh to register an FIR against the Minister or bring him to book. Justice Kant said the High Court had to intervene for the State to register an FIR in the first place and step in again to literally “re-write” the offences listed against the Minister in the FIR. “And till today, what have you done?” Justice Kant asked the counsel representing the State.
“What is that apology? What kind of apology have you tendered? There is some meaning of apology. Sometimes people use docile language only to wriggle out of proceedings, and sometimes they shed crocodile tears. What kind of apology is yours? You want to give the impression that the court had asked you to apologise. What prevented you from making a sincere apology for your crass comments till now?” said Justice Surya Kant. The judge said the minister should have been sensible since it was an “emotive issue” for the armed forces.
It provided Mr Shah relief from arrest but asserted that he “must face consequences.” Asserting that action should have been taken against the minister, the court issued a notice to the Madhya Pradesh government. “We would like to have a close watch. It’s a litmus test for you,” the court told the government.
“The armed forces, perhaps the last institution existing in this country, reflecting integrity, industry, discipline, sacrifice, selflessness, character, honour and indomitable courage… has been targeted by Mr Vijay Shah who has used the language of the gutters against Col Sofiya Qureshi,” the MP High Court had said in a sharply worded observation, stating that there could be no doubt about who he was referring to.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court said the remark was unacceptable and insensitive, with Chief Justice of India BR Gavai calling on those occupying constitutional positions to exercise restraint while giving a speech. He had then asked Mr Shah to apologise to Colonel Qureshi.
Vijay Shah had initially said that his remark was being taken out of context, but later offered to “apologise not once but 10 times.” “Sister Sofiya has brought glory to India by rising above caste and religion…We cannot even think of insulting her in our dreams. Still, if my words have hurt society and religion, then I am ready to apologise ten times,” he had said.
After the order was dictated, the court told Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, who represented Shah, “Meanwhile, you think how you will redeem yourself. We do not want to comment. The entire nation is ashamed of… We are a country that firmly believes in the rule of law. High or small, we follow the same rules for everyone. You had only one minor apprehension…judges never carry prejudices against anyone. That’s why the principle is ordered by the court to cause harm to none. That’s a settled doctrine.”
Singh said Shah is ready to apologise even before the court. However, the bench said, “We don’t require this apology. We know how to deal with it as per law. It’s not that you have committed contempt of court that you require to tender an apology to us. You commit something and then come to court, and because I am entering the court, I will attach an apology. Is it the attitude?”
Singh contended that Shah had expressed genuine regret. But the bench did not agree. “If you are insisting that this is your genuine regret, then it is outrightly rejected. You say ‘If I have hurt’. You are still not ready to admit that you have hurt somebody’s feelings and sentiments… You say, ‘if I have hurt, then my apology’. What is this condition? What does he think of himself?” said Justice Kant.
“You are a responsible person, You are a minister, a public representative. In a representative democracy, you are, in a way, representing millions of people. They expect something. Your standards need to be much higher than the others. You must lead by example. This is what we expect from our leaders,” Justice Kant added.
Singh said that he is willing to apologise again without any ifs. “We don’t want to say, but we leave that to your discretion… Tomorrow, you want to give the impression that you are tendering an apology because the court said, not that you want to do it. This is the message you want to give,” said Justice Kant.
“What is the date when this most unfortunate thing (happened)? Today, we are on May 19. What prevented you from doing it? When the whole country is making a hue and cry. You are fully exposed to the public. You know how people’s sentiments have been so ruthlessly hurt. You have played with their sentiments. You should have done something that, yes, I admit, I have done wrong. You are saying if I have done,” said Justice Kant.
The bench then asked the Madhya Pradesh Government about what it had done “so far” after the registration of the FIR. “First, you register the kind of FIR that the HC has taken notice of, the very next day. What happened after 15, when the HC had to intervene and rewrite your FIR? After that, what have you done? Have somebody examined if any cognizable offence is made out?” asked Justice Kant. The state counsel said, “We are investigating.”
