Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday declined to grant interim bail to Sharmistha Panoli, a law student from Symbiosis Law School, who is facing serious legal trouble after posting an allegedly blasphemous video on social media. The court also directed the State to produce the case diary at the next hearing, slated before the vacation bench.
The case has sparked wide debate on the limits of free speech and the consequences of inflammatory online content, especially in a country as socially diverse and religiously sensitive as India.
The Controversial Video
Panoli allegedly made offensive remarks targeting Prophet Mohammad in a video uploaded on Instagram and X (formerly Twitter), in the backdrop of escalating communal tensions after Operation Sindoor. The video, now deleted, quickly triggered widespread backlash and was flagged for inciting religious disharmony.
Following a swift digital outrage, Panoli issued a public apology on X, claiming her intent was misunderstood. However, the apology did little to prevent legal action. An FIR was filed on May 15, followed by arrest warrants on May 17. Panoli was eventually arrested in Gurugram and transported to Kolkata, where she was remanded to 14 days in judicial custody by a trial court.
Arguments in Court: Was the Arrest Illegal?
Panoli’s legal counsel challenged her arrest and remand, arguing that:
The charges in the FIR were non-cognisable.
She was not served a mandatory notice prior to arrest, as required under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
However, the State’s counsel refuted these claims, asserting that the police had indeed issued a notice but were unable to serve it as Panoli and her family had “fled” to Gurgaon. The State also maintained that her arrest was lawful and that her earlier bail plea had already been heard and denied by the lower court.
Justice Chatterjee: “Be Cautious With Words”
Presiding over the matter, Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee made it clear that the right to free expression comes with responsibility. In powerful courtroom remarks, he said:
“We have freedom of speech but that doesn’t mean you will go on to hurt others. Our country is diverse, with people from different castes, creeds, religions. We must be cautious with what we say.”
He further noted that the matter was not so urgent as to warrant immediate relief:
“So day after tomorrow. Heavens will not fall.”
Awaiting Next Hearing
The court directed the State to produce the case diary at the next hearing, expected to take place before the vacation bench. Until then, Panoli remains in judicial custody, and her plea for interim relief has been set aside for future consideration.
