Supreme Court rejects BJP minister Vijay Shah’s apology, orders SIT probe into remarks against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi

In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to accept BJP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah’s public apology for derogatory remarks made against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, calling it “insincere” and “an attempt to evade legal consequences.” The top court also ordered the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the FIR registered against him.

A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh directed the Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh, to constitute the SIT by 10 a.m. Tuesday. The court stipulated that the three-member SIT must include senior IPS officers from outside the state, with at least one being a woman officer. The team will be headed by an officer of Inspector General (IG) rank, with the other members holding the rank of Superintendent of Police (SP) or higher.

While the court stayed Shah’s arrest, it made it conditional upon his full cooperation with the investigation. The SIT has been instructed to submit a status report on its progress, with the matter scheduled for further hearing on May 28.

The court was hearing two petitions filed by Shah—one challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s suo motu directive to register an FIR over his remarks referring to Colonel Qureshi as a “sister of terrorists,” and another against the High Court’s May 15 decision to monitor the investigation due to dissatisfaction with its initial handling.

Justice Kant did not mince words in rebuking Shah. “What kind of apology is this? Sometimes people apologize just to wriggle out of legal liabilities. This appears to be crocodile tears. We are not ready to accept this apology,” he said. “The kind of crass and shameful comments made, completely thoughtlessly—what prevented you from making a sincere attempt?”

He further added, “You have said ‘If somebody is hurt’—you’re not even willing to take full responsibility.”

The bench also expressed strong disapproval of the Madhya Pradesh government’s handling of the case. “When the High Court had to intervene and essentially re-write your FIR, what were you doing? Has there even been an examination of whether a cognizable offense was made out?” the court asked, emphasizing the need for fair and impartial investigation.

Although the Supreme Court made it clear it would not formally monitor the probe, it indicated that it would maintain a “close watch” on developments.