The Supreme Court on Friday came down heavily on former BJP Spokesperson Nupur Sharma while hearing her petition to club FIRs over remarks on Prophet Mohammed. Blaming Nupur, SC stated that her 'loose tongue' has caused unrest in the whole country and the brutal Udaipur murder of Kanhaiya Lal is a reaction to her statement.

The vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala slammed the former BJP spokesperson for making "disturbing" statements against the Prophet Mohammed on the national television which is deemed as blasphemy by Mohammedans. It also noted that she tendered a mere "conditional apology", that too after a public uproar against her remarks.

"What is her business to make these remarks? The way she has ignited emotions across the country. This lady is single-handedly responsible for what is happening in the country."

The Court also made a reference to the Udaipur killing during the hearing and said Sharma, with her "loose tongue", made irresponsible comments without thinking of the consequences.

As her counsel Senior Advocate Maninder Singh pointed to the written apology issued by her, the Court said,

"She should have gone to the TV and apologized to the nation…She was too late to withdraw... and too she withdraws conditionally, saying if sentiments hurt."

The Supreme Court was of the view that merely being the spokesperson of a national political party does not give any person a license to say such disturbing things. It added,

"These are not religious people at all, they make statements to provoke."

The apex court surprisingly ignored the hatred and violence unleashed by Mohammedans, instead lambasted Nupur for stating merely what is written in Islamic hadiths, and affirmed by Islamic scholars all over the world.

One Twitter user Maulana Fayaz Uf Kani asked Alhakeem, “Salaam Alaikum sheikh @Assimalhakeem, it's been said in India that Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) married Aisha(R.A) at the age of 6 and consummated the marriage at the age of 9. is it true? Please clarify.” To which, Assim Alhakeem responded, “This is 100% true.”

The Supreme Court additionally communicated its booking about Sharma bypassing the lower courts and straightforwardly moving toward the zenith court.

"The request bears a resemblance to her pomposity, that the Magistrates of the nation are excessively little for her."

"At the point when an FIR is enlisted and you are not captured, this shows your clout. She assumes she has reinforcement power and offers reckless expressions", the Court said during the meeting.

During a channel banter on the Gyanvapi Masjid issue in Times Now on May 27, Sharma claimed overly critical comments against Prophet Muhammed. A few FIRs have been enrolled against her from that point.

Today, the Supreme Court saw that the channel had no business to examine the matter which is sub-judice, "but to advance a plan". That's what it added assuming Sharma was aggrieved by the supposed abuse of the discussion, she ought to have held up an FIR against the anchor.

Singh contended the statements were made in a state of provocation. He further submitted that there are serious debates on this issue within the same community, and Sharma's remarks are not something taken out of the box.

He relied on Arnab Goswami's case to argue that the relief of clubbing FIRs may be granted. Singh also referred to the TT Antony case which held that there can be no second FIR on the same cause of action.

Unconvinced, Justice Kant remarked, "The case of a journalist on expressing rights on a particular issue is on a different pedestal from a spokesperson who is lambasting others with irresponsible statements without thinking of the consequences."

It refused to entertain the petition and asked Sharma to approach the High Court. "The conscience of the court is not satisfied. You avail other remedies."

Accordingly, liberty was granted to withdraw the petition.

At least 3 FIRs have been lodged against Sharma in Mumbai, Hyderabad, and Srinagar. The Calcutta High Court has also sought the State's response in a PIL to initiate criminal action against her.

Gaurav Pradhan Analysis

60,020 plus Social Media accounts including 7100 non-verified accounts from Pakistan were created to abuse and target India abroad overstatement of Nupur Sharma.

The scriptwriter: ISI, Lead Role: Rahul Gandhi, Direction: DGISPR, Online Actors: 60000+ Twitter and Facebook handles, Field Actors: The Kerosene spread across India, Extra Free Actors: Hindus sitting on Fence. The popcorns, Raita wing, Soorma Bhopalis of Youtube.

When there is a fire, the fire investigation search for the spark which ignited the fire. The spark Rahul Gandhi was searching for to ignite the Kerosene. My views are not based on perception or social media narrative but strategic and will be highly unpopular.

I stand by the Supreme Court judgment. But If you carefully with a calm mind read SC judgment on Nupur, SC has shown safe passage to Nupur. 

What actually Supreme Court said today to Hindus in Nupur Case while showing her the safe passage.

Supreme Court explicitly said that if she was offended by some remark she should have “filed an FIR”, this statement comes directly from Supreme Court. Now since Modi ji can’t speak on matters of religion he made Supreme Court say this.

Hence I stand by SC judgment but also support NUPUR.

Remember day one I said that BJP is not just a part but a RULING PARTY and hence its appointed spokespersons need to be very careful in public statements.