The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and Madhya Pradesh minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his remarks against against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who briefed the media during India’s recent military operation against Pakistan.
The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh was hearing a petition moved by Shah against a Madhya Pradesh High Court order directing registration of an FIR against him. “The entire nation is ashamed of you. It is up to you how you redeem yourself,” the Court remarked.
Shah had stirred controversy after he reportedly remarked: “Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson.” The High Court had then taken suo motu note of his comments and ordered registration of a criminal case against him.
Justice Kant said Shah had made “crass” remarks and questioned the sincerity of the apology given by him later.
“We don’t require this apology. We know how to deal with him as per law. It is not that you have committed contempt of court that you require to tender an apology to us. You commit something and then come to the Court with apology. Is this the attitude?,” the Court asked.
It added that he had made the apology to evade the consequences of his actions. “What is that apology? There is some meaning to this word ‘apology’. Sometime people in very docile language, they will say a very artificial kind of apology only to wriggle out of the consequences and sometimes people shed crocodile tear also. So which one your case falls … we would like to know”.
The Court today constituted a Special Investigation Team of senior India Police Service (IPS) officers to probe the matter and also directed Shah to join the investigation, while staying his arrest in the meantime.
The Court said Shah as a seasoned politician should have been mindful of his comments. “You are a public figure. You are a seasoned politician. You are a public figure. You should weigh your words when you speak, and if you have made so many utterances, you should be sure.”
It went to observe that it seemed he intended to use more filthy language in his speech.
“People are not reporting because, unfortunately, media people only pick up two words from you. They are not really going into depth of your video. You were at the verge of using very abusive language. Then you stop because you couldn’t find any alternate word. When we watch your video, you were at a particular stage going to use very filthy language further. But either some sense prevailed upon you, or you couldn’t find that word.”