<p>In a display of rage, the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme%20court">Supreme Court</a> on Friday asked the Madhya Pradesh government to decide on granting sanction to prosecute minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his objectionable remarks targeting Army officer Col Sofiya Qureshi made in aftermath of <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/operation%20sindoor">Operation Sindoor</a>. </p><p>"Enough is enough", a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said. </p><p>The SC termed the objectionable statement of Shah as "most unfortunate". This came after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the state, said that the minister made "unfortunate" remarks and apologised quickly.</p><p>"What he said was definitely unfortunate," Mehta said.</p><p>The CJI said, "Not unfortunate, but most unfortunate and then he has no sense of repentence also".</p>.Remarks on Op Sindoor | Haryana govt refuses sanction to prosecute Ashoka University Professor: Supreme Court.<p>The bench refused to hear further submissions made on behalf of Shah and the state. Instead, it asked to comply within four weeks with its January 19 direction asking the Madhya Pradesh government to take an appropriate decision regarding grant of sanction.</p><p>"Enough is enough. You comply with the directions given in paragraphs five and six of our previous order," the bench told the state and listed the matter after summer vacation.</p><p>Shah faced a Supreme Court-appointed SIT probe for "scurrilous" and "objectionable" remarks targeting Col Qureshi.</p><p>Mehta said the minister was probably intending to praise the army officer but it he ended up saying something else and could not articulate it properly. However, he clarified that he was not defending Shah, but was his personal view.</p><p>"These political personalities, we know if they want to praise, how articulate they are with their words," the CJI said, adding that Shah should have apologised soon after if it was a slip of tounge.</p><p>Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Shah, said the minister had immediately issued an apology.</p><p>The bench said as per its January 19 order, the state was required to take decision on grant of sanction within two weeks.</p><p>"Let the state take a call on this," the bench said.</p><p>The apex court had on January 19 noted that the SIT has completed its probe and submitted its final report.</p><p>However, further proceedings have been stalled as the report awaits mandatory sanction from the state government under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which deals with the promotion of communal hatred and ill-will.</p><p>The top court had opened and perused the SIT's sealed cover report, noting that the panel had sought the government's sanction to prosecute him after investigating various aspects.</p><p>It had asked the SIT to make an endeavour to find out the details of the other instances attributed to Shah, a brief reference to which was made in the SIT report.</p><p>"A separate status report in relation to those instances shall also be submitted to this court," the bench had said on January 19.</p><p>Shah was pulled up the the Supreme Court on July 28, 2025 for not publicly apologising over his remarks on record against Col Qureshi, saying he was "testing the court's patience".</p><p>It had pointed out that the minister's conduct was prompting it to doubt his intentions and bona fides.</p>.Not granted sanction to prosecute professor Mahmudabad as one-time magnanimity: Haryana to Supreme Court .<p>On May 28, last year, the top court ordered the closure of proceedings before the Madhya Pradesh High Court against Shah for his controversial remarks against Col Qureshi and asked for a status report from the SIT.</p><p>Earlier, the top court chided Shah and constituted the SIT to probe the FIR lodged against him.</p><p>Shah came under fire after a video, which was circulated widely, showed him allegedly making objectionable remarks against Col Qureshi, who gained nationwide prominence along with another woman officer, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, during the media briefings on Operation Sindoor.</p><p>The high court rebuked Shah for passing "scurrilous" remarks and using "language of the gutters" against Col Qureshi, and ordered police to file an FIR against him on the charge of promoting enmity and hatred.</p><p>After drawing severe condemnation, Shah expressed regret and said he respects Col Qureshi more than his sister. </p><p><em>(With PTI reports)</em></p>
<p>In a display of rage, the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme%20court">Supreme Court</a> on Friday asked the Madhya Pradesh government to decide on granting sanction to prosecute minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his objectionable remarks targeting Army officer Col Sofiya Qureshi made in aftermath of <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/operation%20sindoor">Operation Sindoor</a>. </p><p>"Enough is enough", a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said. </p><p>The SC termed the objectionable statement of Shah as "most unfortunate". This came after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the state, said that the minister made "unfortunate" remarks and apologised quickly.</p><p>"What he said was definitely unfortunate," Mehta said.</p><p>The CJI said, "Not unfortunate, but most unfortunate and then he has no sense of repentence also".</p>.Remarks on Op Sindoor | Haryana govt refuses sanction to prosecute Ashoka University Professor: Supreme Court.<p>The bench refused to hear further submissions made on behalf of Shah and the state. Instead, it asked to comply within four weeks with its January 19 direction asking the Madhya Pradesh government to take an appropriate decision regarding grant of sanction.</p><p>"Enough is enough. You comply with the directions given in paragraphs five and six of our previous order," the bench told the state and listed the matter after summer vacation.</p><p>Shah faced a Supreme Court-appointed SIT probe for "scurrilous" and "objectionable" remarks targeting Col Qureshi.</p><p>Mehta said the minister was probably intending to praise the army officer but it he ended up saying something else and could not articulate it properly. However, he clarified that he was not defending Shah, but was his personal view.</p><p>"These political personalities, we know if they want to praise, how articulate they are with their words," the CJI said, adding that Shah should have apologised soon after if it was a slip of tounge.</p><p>Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for Shah, said the minister had immediately issued an apology.</p><p>The bench said as per its January 19 order, the state was required to take decision on grant of sanction within two weeks.</p><p>"Let the state take a call on this," the bench said.</p><p>The apex court had on January 19 noted that the SIT has completed its probe and submitted its final report.</p><p>However, further proceedings have been stalled as the report awaits mandatory sanction from the state government under Section 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which deals with the promotion of communal hatred and ill-will.</p><p>The top court had opened and perused the SIT's sealed cover report, noting that the panel had sought the government's sanction to prosecute him after investigating various aspects.</p><p>It had asked the SIT to make an endeavour to find out the details of the other instances attributed to Shah, a brief reference to which was made in the SIT report.</p><p>"A separate status report in relation to those instances shall also be submitted to this court," the bench had said on January 19.</p><p>Shah was pulled up the the Supreme Court on July 28, 2025 for not publicly apologising over his remarks on record against Col Qureshi, saying he was "testing the court's patience".</p><p>It had pointed out that the minister's conduct was prompting it to doubt his intentions and bona fides.</p>.Not granted sanction to prosecute professor Mahmudabad as one-time magnanimity: Haryana to Supreme Court .<p>On May 28, last year, the top court ordered the closure of proceedings before the Madhya Pradesh High Court against Shah for his controversial remarks against Col Qureshi and asked for a status report from the SIT.</p><p>Earlier, the top court chided Shah and constituted the SIT to probe the FIR lodged against him.</p><p>Shah came under fire after a video, which was circulated widely, showed him allegedly making objectionable remarks against Col Qureshi, who gained nationwide prominence along with another woman officer, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, during the media briefings on Operation Sindoor.</p><p>The high court rebuked Shah for passing "scurrilous" remarks and using "language of the gutters" against Col Qureshi, and ordered police to file an FIR against him on the charge of promoting enmity and hatred.</p><p>After drawing severe condemnation, Shah expressed regret and said he respects Col Qureshi more than his sister. </p><p><em>(With PTI reports)</em></p>