The Impressive TimesNew Delhi : The Supreme Court of India on Thursday came down heavily on Madhya Pradesh minister Kunwar Vijay Shah for his controversial remarks against Indian Army officer Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who recently briefed the media on Operation Sindoor—a strategic military operation targeting Pakistani positions.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Justice B.R. Gavai, and Justice A.G. Masih expressed serious displeasure over the minister’s statements, emphasizing the need for constitutional office-bearers to act with restraint and responsibility, especially during sensitive national security situations.
“You hold a constitutional position. You should have exercised a degree of restraint, especially when the country is undergoing such a situation,” the bench observed. The court was hearing a petition seeking legal action against Shah for his public comments that many termed as derogatory and demoralizing towards the armed forces.
Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, a decorated Army officer, had briefed the media earlier this week regarding the execution and objectives of Operation Sindoor. Her clear articulation of India’s strategic intent and defense preparedness earned widespread praise. However, her involvement drew sharp and unwarranted criticism from Minister Shah, who questioned the propriety of her media presence and insinuated political motives—comments that triggered outrage across military and civil society circles.
The Supreme Court’s rebuke comes amid rising calls for accountability and dignity in public discourse, particularly when it concerns the armed forces. The bench noted that such comments have the potential to not only demoralize serving officers but also politicize the military—an institution that operates above partisan lines.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, informed the court that the Union Government distances itself from the minister’s comments and reaffirmed full respect and support for all armed forces personnel. He further assured the court that appropriate sensitization of public representatives would be undertaken.
The court did not pass any directive at this stage but issued a strong advisory, reminding public figures of the constitutional values they are sworn to uphold. It also asked the petitioner to submit a detailed transcript of the minister’s comments and scheduled the next hearing after two weeks.
No Comments: