MP: Suspense Over Fate of MP Minister Deepens After SC Censure

A two-judge bench of Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh told the minister that it had seen his videos where he made the remarks and his apology and wondered if “they were crocodile tears or an attempt to wriggle out of the legal proceedings”.

Justice Kant said: “The entire nation was in shame due to the comments... We saw your videos, you were on the verge of using very filthy language but somehow better sense prevailed or you did not find suitable words. You should be shameful. The entire country is proud of our Army and you made this statement.”

The apex court directed the Madhya Pradesh DGP to constitute a three-member SIT headed by an inspector general rank officer by Tuesday 10 am also comprising a woman officer to probe the FIR registered against the minister following an order of the Madhya Pradesh high court.

The top court also directed that the SIT should file its first status report by May 28, when the matter will come up for hearing again.

The bench directed Mr Shah to join and fully cooperate with the investigation and said “subject thereto, as of now, his arrest shall remain stayed.”

“We are not saying monitoring, but we will keep a close watch. So it’s a litmus test for you,” the court said while ordering the probe.

After the order was dictated, the court told senior advocate Maninder Singh, who represented Mr Shah: “Meanwhile, you think how you will redeem yourself. We do not want to comment. The entire nation is
ashamed of… We are a country that firmly believes in the rule of law. High or small, we follow the same rules for everyone.”

Being a public representative, the minister ought to have led by an example and used every single word sensibly, the bench further remarked. “You are a responsible person, You are a minister, a public representative. In a representative democracy, you are, in a way, representing millions of people. They expect something. Your standards need to be much higher than the others. You must lead by example. This is what we expect from our leaders,” Justice Kant said.

The top court also pulled up the state government and said: “First, you register the kind of FIR that the HC has taken notice of, the very next day. What happened after May 15, when the HC had to intervene and rewrite your FIR? After that, what have you done? Has somebody examined if any cognisable offence is made out?” “People are expecting that the action of the state will also be fair. HC has done its duty, they thought it’s a matter where suo motu intervention is needed.”

After drawing severe criticism for his comments made on May 12, the BJP minister said he was ready to apologise 10 times if his statement had hurt anyone and he respected Col. Qureshi more than his sister.

Following the high court order on May 14, an FIR was registered against Mr Shah in Indore district.

On Mr Shah’s apology, the top court remarked : “What kind of apology was this? You should have simply admitted your mistake and apologized, but you say if you have said this and that… then I apologise. This is not the way to seek apology. The kind of crass comments you made, you should be shameful.”

The court went on: “You should have been more sensible. Such an emotive issue… One has to see the timing. It’s such an emotive issue for the Indian forces. And each one of us needs to be very, very responsible. We said we are proud of our Army. We repeat. They are on the frontlines.”

The bench was hearing petitions filed by Mr Shah challenging the Madhya Pradesh high court’s suo motu order directing the registration of an FIR against him for the alleged remarks.

In its order, the top court said: “Having gone through the contents of the statement attributed to the petitioner, also the contents of the apology said to have been tendered by him, we are satisfied that subject FIR requires to be investigated by an SIT comprising three senior, directly recruited IPS officers of MP cadre, but who do not belong the state…We are further of the opinion that out of the three, one should be a woman IPS officer. The director-general of police, MP, is directed to constitute the SIT before tomorrow at 10 am. It shall be headed by an officer not below the rank of IGP, and both members shall also be of rank SP or above.”

It was after the high court order on May 14 that an FIR was registered against Mr Shah in Indore. The FIR was registered under Sections 152 (acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India), 196 (1)(b) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, language, or other similar characteristics) and 197(1)(c) (statement or action that causes or is likely to cause disharmony, enmity, or hatred between different groups) of the BNS.