Nupur Sharma case: Why was a TV host not charged with a crime? Delhi Police and the SC

The Supreme Court criticised suspended BJP politician Nupur Sharma for making offensive remarks about the Prophet and questioned how the Delhi Police handled the situation. The supreme court said that Nupur Sharma’s “loose tongue” “set the whole country on fire” and told her to apologise for what she said.

Sharma tried to get the FIRs filed against her in several states over the remark to be combined, but the bench said that the remark was made for cheap publicity, political reasons, or malicious reasons.

“She talks too much and has said stupid things on TV, which have stirred up the country. She says she’s been a lawyer for ten years… She should have said sorry to the whole country “judge remarked.

Sharma’s comment about the Prophet led to demonstrations all over the country and upset many Gulf countries. BJP put her on leave.

“These remarks are rude and upsetting. What is she saying? These comments cause terrible things to happen… They don’t believe in God. They don’t understand other religions. The judges said that the comments were made to get cheap attention, push political agendas, or do something else bad.

Sharma was able to drop her FIR-clubbing petition because Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala were on vacation. The panel also said that Nupur Sharma’s apology came too late, was based on conditions, etc. She ought to have apologised straight away on TV, the SC decided.

The court said that her plea “smacks of arrogance” because she thinks the country’s judge is too small. Sharma’s lawyer said that she was a party spokesperson and that her words were said by accident.

The bench remarked, “You can’t say things like this if you’re a party spokeswoman.” If the debate was mishandled, “She should have filed a FIR against the anchor,”

Sharma’s lawyer said that she had answered other debaters, and he used the transcript to back up his claim. Bench: “Why did TV debate? Why did they pick a contentious subject?”

When her lawyer said she was taking part in the Delhi Police investigation and not running, the bench said, “How far along is the investigation? What the Delhi Police did before Don’t make us talk! You were given the royal treatment.

After 30 minutes, the bench said it didn’t believe she was telling the truth and turned down the petition.