The Supreme Court strongly criticised the Madhya Pradesh Government for delaying sanction in the FIR against Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah over his offensive remarks targeting Indian Army officer Col Sofiya Qureshi, warning the State against prolonged inaction despite SIT findings.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has directed the Madhya Pradesh government to take a final decision within two weeks on granting sanction to prosecute BJP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his controversial remarks against Indian Army officer Colonel Sofiya Qureshi. The Court made it clear that the State cannot indefinitely delay its statutory obligation merely because the matter is pending before the apex court.
The direction came while hearing Kunwar Vijay Shah v. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh & Anr., arising out of a suo motu order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court directing registration of an FIR against Shah.
The case was heard by a Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Dipankar Datta, and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
During the hearing, the SIT’s sealed status report was opened in open court. The Bench noted that:
- The SIT examined various aspects of the allegations
- Certain older instances referred to in the writ petition were excluded from the present investigation
- Statements of 27 witnesses had been recorded
However, the State Government had not taken any decision on the SIT’s request for sanction, citing the pendency of the case before the Supreme Court.
Expressing strong displeasure, CJI Surya Kant remarked:
“Statute casts an obligation on you and you must take a call. You are sitting over the SIT report since August 19, 2025. It is January 19 now.”
The Court categorically rejected the State’s justification and directed it to decide on a sanction within two weeks and file a compliance affidavit.
Directions to SIT
The Supreme Court has now issued clear and time-bound directions:
- The State of Madhya Pradesh is directed to take an appropriate decision within two weeks regarding the sanction.
- The State must file a compliance affidavit before the Court.
- The SIT is directed to trace and identify victims of the alleged instances attributed to the petitioner.
- The SIT must submit a status report on further aspects requiring inquiry.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on August 18, with status reports to be filed before the next date.
ALSO READ: Remarks on Col Sofiya Qureshi: SC to Hear MP Minister Vijay Shah’s Plea Today
Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Kunwar Vijay Shah, submitted that his client had tendered an apology and was cooperating with the investigation.
The Bench, however, responded
“Where is the apology? Nothing is on record.”
the CJI observed.
The Court recalled that it had earlier criticised Shah’s online apology, noting that it lacked sincerity and failed to meet the standards expected from a constitutional functionary. The Bench had earlier warned that Shah’s conduct was testing the Court’s patience and raised doubts about his bona fides.
Background of the Case
Vijay Shah, a BJP leader and state minister, made derogatory comments against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi. The remarks were deemed defamatory and inflammatory, prompting public outrage and legal action.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court took suo motu cognizance and ordered registration of an FIR against Shah for using offensive language and harming the dignity of an Indian Army officer.
Shah approached the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s order.
High Court’s Suo Motu Action
Taking strong exception to the remarks, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, in a suo motu proceeding, ordered the police to register an FIR against Shah. Justice Atul Sreedharan of the High Court observed:
“His comments are disparaging and dangerous, not just to the officer in question but to the armed forces itself.”
An FIR was registered on May 14, 2025, under the following provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS):
- Section 152 – Acts endangering the sovereignty and integrity of India
- Section 196(1)(b) – Promoting enmity between groups
- Section 197(1)(c) – Acts prejudicial to national harmony
Shah subsequently approached the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s order.
Supreme Court’s Earlier Orders
On May 16, 2025, the Supreme Court refused to quash the FIR or accept Shah’s apology. While granting him protection from arrest, the Court directed the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising senior police officers.
By an order dated May 19, 2025, the Court clarified that the SIT must consist of officers of a rank higher than SP/SSP, and directed it to conduct an independent and fair investigation.
The SIT completed its investigation and submitted its report to the State Government on August 13, 2025, seeking sanction for prosecution, which is mandatory under Section 196 BNS before a court can take cognisance of the offence.
Case Title:
Kunwar Vijay Shah vs. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh and Anr.
SLP(Crl) No. 8449/2025
READ LIVE COVERAGE
Click Here to Read More Reports On Col Sofiya Qureshi