The Supreme Court on Friday took strong exception to the prolonged delay by the Madhya Pradesh government in deciding the Special Investigation Team’s (SIT) request for sanction to prosecute State minister Kunwar Vijay Shah over his objectionable remarks against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, observing that “enough is enough”.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi noted that the SIT’s request for sanction to prosecute had been pending with the State government since August 19, 2025, despite the court’s January 19, 2026 direction to take a decision within two weeks.
During the January 19, 2026 hearing, the Supreme Court had questioned the Madhya Pradesh government over its failure to decide on the SIT’s request for sanction to prosecute Shah and expressed dissatisfaction over the continued inaction.
Directing the State government to take a decision within two weeks, Chief Justice Surya Kant had observed, “You are sitting over the SIT report since August 19, 2025. Statute casts an obligation on you and you must take a call. It is January 19 now.” The court had underlined that the State could not indefinitely delay a decision mandated by law.
The SIT had sought sanction to prosecute Shah for offences under Sections 196(1)(a) and 196(1)(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The court’s sharp remarks on Friday came after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the State government, informed the Bench that the SIT’s request for sanction to prosecute Shah was still pending before the Madhya Pradesh government.
Attempting to explain the minister’s statement, the Solicitor General submitted that the remarks were unfortunate and may have been misunderstood, suggesting that Shah perhaps intended to praise the Army officer but failed to articulate himself properly.
The Bench, however, was not inclined to accept the explanation. Chief Justice Kant observed that the remarks could not merely be described as unfortunate, but were “most unfortunate”. The court further remarked that a seasoned politician was fully aware of how to appropriately express appreciation for an officer.
“Just comply with our order now. Enough is enough. The first thing should have been an apology. It was only after we took cognisance,” the Bench observed while posting the matter for hearing after four weeks.
Justice Bagchi also referred to the SIT status report, which, according to the court, indicated that the minister had a pattern of making such comments. The Bench said the State government should consider the entire factual background while taking a decision on sanction.
Colonel Qureshi was among the Army officers who briefed the media during Operation Sindoor, India’s cross-border military response launched after the Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 civilians were killed.
The controversy arose after Shah, during a public event in Raikunda village in Mhow, allegedly remarked: “Those who widowed our daughters, we sent a sister of their own to teach them a lesson.” The remark was widely perceived as a communal insinuation targeting the officer and her religious identity.
The remarks triggered widespread outrage and prompted the Madhya Pradesh High Court to take suo motu cognisance. The High Court directed the registration of an FIR against the minister, observing that the comments were disparaging and harmful not only to the officer concerned but also to the armed forces.
An FIR was subsequently registered under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to acts endangering national integrity and promoting enmity between groups.
Shah later approached the Supreme Court challenging the High Court order. While refusing to stay the FIR, the apex court constituted an SIT to investigate the matter, though it granted him protection from arrest.