The Madhya Pradesh High Court criticizes state police for a flawed FIR in the hate speech case involving BJP Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah and Army officer Col. Sofiya Qureshi. Read how the court exposed lapses and demanded accountability.

Court Rebukes Police Over Flawed FIR in Col. Sofiya Qureshi Hate Speech Case

On May 15, 2025, the Madhya Pradesh High Court strongly reprimanded the state police for filing a poorly drafted FIR against BJP Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah. The case concerns controversial remarks he made about Army officer Colonel Sofiya Qureshi.

High Court Criticizes Intent Behind FIR Drafting

The court questioned the intent of the police, stating that the FIR appeared to be “drafted in such a way that it can be quashed.” The bench observed that the report lacked essential elements that define a cognisable offense under Indian law. “There is nothing in the FIR,” the judges remarked, demanding clarity and completeness.

Judicial Oversight Demanded for Transparency

To ensure justice, the court announced that the ongoing investigation would be monitored. It instructed authorities to include the complete text of the High Court’s previous order—particularly Paragraph 12—within the amended FIR. The court stressed the need to explicitly outline Vijay Shah’s actions.

Legal Counsel Under Fire for Weak Defense

The judges expressed dissatisfaction with the state’s legal representatives. When the lawyer admitted to not drafting the FIR himself, the judge retorted, “Obviously you have not drafted it!” The bench emphasized that merely attaching the court’s decision to the FIR does not suffice. “The content must be in the FIR,” the judge insisted.

Accusations of Intentional Omission

Despite assurances from the Advocate General that the police would follow the court’s directions, the judges noted that the act of filing such an incomplete FIR revealed a deliberate attempt to protect the minister. “The act makes the intention clear,” the court declared.

Minister Faces Multiple Legal Challenges

Following the High Court’s criticism, Vijay Shah petitioned the Supreme Court of India for redress. Meanwhile, another case has been registered in Indore under relevant provisions of the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). A recent court ruling had termed Shah’s remarks as “disparaging and dangerous.”

Public Outrage and Political Fallout

Despite issuing a public apology via video—saying, “I sincerely apologise from the bottom of my heart, and I am not only ashamed and saddened by my statement”—Shah’s comments drew intense backlash. The remarks were made during a government event, where he implied that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had sent a “sister from the same community” as Pakistanis to avenge a terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir.

Congress Reacts Strongly to Shah’s Remarks

The controversial statement gave political ammunition to the opposition. Mallikarjun Kharge, the national president of the Indian National Congress, labeled Shah’s comments as “insulting, shameful, and vulgar,” demanding his immediate removal from office.

Conclusion: A Case Reflecting Accountability and Judicial Vigilance

The controversy surrounding Kunwar Vijay Shah and Col. Sofiya Qureshi underscores the critical role of the judiciary in upholding justice and ensuring due process, especially when political figures are involved. The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s sharp scrutiny of the FIR not only exposed procedural lapses but also reinforced the need for transparent, unbiased investigations. As legal proceedings continue and political debate intensifies, the case serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s power to demand accountability and protect the integrity of democratic institutions.