Bhopal: The Opposition Congress on Tuesday mounted a fresh attack on the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led Madhya Pradesh government, accusing it of shielding state minister Vijay Shah by delaying sanction to prosecute him over his controversial remarks against Army officer Colonel Sofiya Qureshi.
Madhya Pradesh Congress president Jitu Patwari and Leader of Opposition Umang Singhar led the attack, alleging that despite the Supreme Court monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) completing its investigation, the prosecution process against Shah had been kept pending.
Patwari said the government should act on the SIT report and questioned the delay in granting sanction.
Writing on X, he alleged: “First, the insult to the Army; now shielding those who committed offences against the Army! By making objectionable remarks about Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, Minister Vijay Shah insulted the Indian Army and a brave daughter of the nation. Now, by attempting to shield him, the Mohan government has made it clear that for them, a minister’s chair matters more than respect for a soldier.”
He added that by protecting Shah, the Cabinet was disrespecting the Army’s honour.
LoP Singhar alleged that the government was deliberately avoiding action despite repeated Supreme Court directions.
He wrote on X: “Regarding the case involving Vijay Shah’s objectionable remarks, the Supreme Court monitored SIT has been seeking sanction for prosecution for the past year, yet the Cabinet is refusing permission. On public platforms, there is talk of respecting women, but in the Cabinet, decisions are made to shield a minister. Why does the BJP prioritise defending its minister over honouring Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who brought glory to the nation through Operation Sindoor?”
Congress’ reaction came after Chief Minister Mohan Yadav led Cabinet met on Tuesday. While the party accused the government of shielding Shah, neither the state government nor the BJP has responded to the allegations.
Sources said the SIT has completed its inquiry and sought sanction to prosecute Shah under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Government sanction is required before proceedings can be initiated against a public servant in such circumstances.
The controversy dates back to May 2025, when Shah, while addressing a public gathering in Mhow near Indore, made remarks widely interpreted as linking Colonel Qureshi, who had briefed the media during Operation Sindoor, with the community associated with terrorists involved in the Pahalgam attack.
His remarks sparked outrage and calls for his resignation.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court took suo motu cognisance, criticised the language used and directed registration of an FIR.
The Supreme Court later constituted the SIT and repeatedly questioned the state government over delays in sanctioning prosecution.
On January 19, the apex court gave the government two weeks to decide. When no action followed, it again directed compliance within four weeks in May. An office report in July noted that no documents had been filed, highlighting continued delay.
Shah has apologised several times, attributing his remarks to “patriotic fervour” and maintaining he meant no disrespect to Colonel Qureshi or the Army. The Supreme Court has previously questioned the sincerity of his apologies.
The case has assumed wider significance as it involves remarks against an Army officer who publicly briefed the nation during Operation Sindoor following the Pahalgam terror attack.
(IANS)
