Congress leader Dr. Jaya Thakur has approached the Supreme Court with a writ petition seeking the removal of BJP leader Kunwar Vijay Shah from his ministerial post over remarks made about Indian Air Force officer Colonel Sofia Qureshi during ‘Operation Sindoor’. The petition alleges that Shahโs statement was inflammatory, communal, and violative of his constitutional oath.
Filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, the plea calls for Shahโs removal through a writ of quo-warranto on the ground that his conduct breached the oath taken under Article 164(3), which mandates ministers to uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India and discharge duties without โfear or favour, affection or ill-willโ.
Shahโs Controversial Remarks
Colonel Sofia Qureshi, a senior officer of the Indian Armed Forces, had become the public face of ‘Operation Sindoor’ following her briefings on India’s military action against terrorist sites in Pakistan. At a public event, Minister Shah reportedly said:
โJinhone humari betiyon ke sindoor ujade theโฆ humne unhiki behen bhej kar ke unki aisi ki taisi karwayi.โ
(Translation: Those people who wiped the sindoor off our daughtersโ foreheads… we avenged them by sending their own sister to destroy them.)
Dr. Thakurโs petition argues that this statement amounts to associating a Muslim officer with the enemy and implying shared identity with terrorists solely on the basis of religion. The petition claims this is “encouraging separatist activities” and threatening national unity.
Oath Violation and Constitutional Grounds
The plea points to Form V under the Third Schedule of the Constitution, which outlines the oath ministers must take. The oath includes an undertaking to โuphold the sovereignty and integrity of Indiaโ and to โdo right to all manner of peopleโฆ without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.โ
The petition contends that Shahโs speech stands in clear violation of this oath.
โThat speech is directly violated the oath prescribed under Schedule 3 of the Constitution of India,โ the plea states.
Reference to Tehseen Poonawalla Judgment
The petitioner also cites the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Tehseen Poonawalla vs Union of India, where the court declared that hate crimes and communal violence run counter to the Constitutionโs rule of law and morality. In that case, the Court urged Parliament to frame special legislation to combat mob lynching and communal violence.
The petition submits that Shahโs statement not only promotes communal disharmony but also undermines constitutional values.
Relief Sought
The petitioner seeks:
- Issuance of a writ of quo-warranto to disqualify Vijay Shah from holding the ministerial post
- Any other relief the court deems appropriate in the interest of justice
Related Proceedings Already Before SC
Notably, Shah is already facing judicial scrutiny in connected matters. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta is hearing two petitions filed by the minister. In those proceedings, the Court had earlier ordered the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising three senior IPS officers from outside Madhya Pradesh to probe the FIR registered against him.
The bench had also passed interim orders staying Shahโs arrest, first on May 19, and subsequently extended the same on May 28.
