BJP minister's comment on Colonel Sofiya Qureshi: MP High Court to monitor probe, notes gaps in FIR

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Thursday pulled up the State for gaps in the First Information Report (FIR) filed against Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his comments targeting Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, the Indian Army officer who had briefed the media about Operation Sindoor against Pakistan..A Bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Anuradha Shukla had yesterday initiated a suo motu case in the matter and ordered the registration of an FIR against Shah by Wednesday evening.Today, Advocate General (AG) Prashant Singh informed the Court that an FIR has been registered. However, the Court observed that the FIR has been drafted in a casual manner."Have you read the FIR? How has it been drafted? There are no ingredients. It has been drafted in such a manner that it can be quashed. Content must be there in FIR. The allegations must come out...FIR get quashed because it does not reflect ingredients. There is no description of what offence is, except for saying order dated so and so. That is why we draw our inferences. It (FIR) only says certain directions are given," Justice Sreedharan remarked. .The Court recorded these concerns in its order and said that it would monitor the investigation against Shah. "This Court has examined paragraph-12 of the FIR, which must necessarily lay down the ingredients of the offence by connecting it to the act of the offender. The FIR is brief. Having gone through the FIR in its entirety, there is not a single mention of the actions of the suspect, which would satisfy the ingredients of the offences which have been registered against him," it said.The Court added that the operative portion of the order is nothing but reproduction of order passed by High Court on Wednesday.It does not have a whisper of the earlier part of the order, which lays down in detail, the actions of the suspect and how they constitute an offence under each of the sections mentioned, it further observed. The Court went on to remark that the FIR was registered "in such a manner leaving sufficient space open so that if it is challenged later, the same may be quashed because it is deficient in material particulars of the actions which constitutes each of the specific offences." "This is gross subterfuge on the part of the of the State. The FIR has been drawn in a manner so as to assist the suspect Mr. Vijay Shah to be able to have the FIR quashed on a later date," the Court opined.Accordingly, the Court directed that its May 14 order would be read as part of the FIR for all judicial, quasi-judicial and investigative purposes."In order to ensure that said subterfuge is nipped in the bud, this Court directs that the entire order of 14.05.2025 shall be read as part of paragraph 12 of the FIR for all judicial, quasi judicial and investigating process henceforth.".Further, the Court said it was necessary to monitor the investigation. "In view of the nature of the case and the manner in which the FIR has been registered, which does not inspire confidence of this Court, and the Court is of the opinion that if the case is not duly monitored, the police would not investigate fairly in the interest of justice in accordance with law. Under the circumstances, this Court feels compelled to ensure that it monitors the investigation without interfering in the independence of the investigating agency but only to the extent of monitoring that it acts fairly in accordance with law without being influenced by any extraneous pressures or directions."The case will be heard next on June 16..Meanwhile, Shah has approached the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's May 14 order. The top court today declined to grant him any interim relief or stay of the FIR registered against him, but said it would hear the case tomorrow."Such a person holding a constitutional office should be responsible...when this country is going through such a situation, he has to know what he is saying. Just because you are a minister...We will hear it tomorrow," Chief Justice of India BR Gavai said..Before the High Court, AG Singh today assured that the State has had every intention to comply with court orders. He added that it was unfortunate that the High Court was viewing the State with such suspicion."Mujhe thoda dukh hai, State ko shakh se naa dekhe (I am a little sad, please don't view the State with suspicion). Within four hours, we have complied. We are still open to comply," the AG said."We are not questioning time. We are not satisfied with contents (of the FIR)," the Court replied."Aap jaise bolenge, comply karenge. Pura order hai sir. Date of incident hai. Place of incident hai (We will comply with whatever you say, the full order is there in the FIR, sir, including date of incident and place of incident). Matter is now under investigation," the AG added..The Court yesterday had directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to immediately register an FIR against Shah and warned that it would initiate contempt of court proceedings if this directive was not obeyed. It noted that Shah had used "the language of the gutters" by allegedly referring to Colonel Qureshi as the “sister of terrorists.”Colonel Qureshi was one of the Army officers who had briefed the media about India's recent cross-border military response, Operation Sindoor, against Pakistan. The operation was conducted in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack of April 22.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 comment was widely viewed as a veiled reference to Colonel Qureshi.In yesterday's hearing of the matter, the High Court had noted that Shah's comments, prima facie, attracted the offence under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) which criminalises actions that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India."Prima facie, the statement of the minister that Col. Sofia Quraishi is the sister of the terrorist who carried out the attack at Pahalgam encourages feelings of separatist activities by imputing separatist feeling to anyone who is Muslim, which thereby endangers the sovereignty or unity and integrity of India. Thus, this court is, prima facie, satisfied that the first offence made out against the minister was under Section 152 of the B.N.S," the High Court said..The Court added that Section 196 of the BNS, which deals with promoting enmity between different groups, was also prima facie made out since Colonel Sofia Qureshi is a Muslim."Prima facie, this section would be applicable as Col. Sofia Quraishi is an adherent of the Muslim faith and deriding her by referring to her as the sister of terrorists may be prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religions groups as it has the propensity to fuel an impression that irrespective of the selfless duties of a person towards India, such a person could still be derided only because that person belongs to the Muslim faith. Therefore, prima facie, this Court is satisfied that the offence under Section 196(1)(b) is also committed."Further, it opined that the statement made by Shah prima facie also has the propensity to cause disharmony and feelings of enmity or hatred or ill-will between Muslims and non-Muslims.Thus, the Court said Section 197, which penalises imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration, is also prima facie made out against Shah..[Read Live Coverage].[Read Order]