Sharmishta Panoli, a 22-year-old law student and Instagram influencer, has recently been at the center of a significant controversy, leading to her arrest and igniting debates around “selective justice” in India.
The Controversy:
Panoli posted a video on Instagram, reportedly on May 14, 2025, in which she criticized Bollywood celebrities for their silence on “Operation Sindoor” and allegedly made derogatory comments about a specific religious community and its Prophet. The video quickly went viral, leading to widespread backlash, including online abuse and threats.
Her Response and Arrest:
Facing the severe criticism, Panoli deleted the controversial video on May 15, 2025, and issued an unconditional apology, stating that her comments were personal feelings and she never intentionally wanted to hurt anyone. However, a formal complaint had already been filed against her in Kolkata.
Kolkata Police subsequently initiated legal proceedings. They claim they attempted to serve legal notices to Panoli and her family multiple times, but they were allegedly absconding. Consequently, an arrest warrant was issued by a court. On May 30, 2025, Kolkata Police arrested Panoli from Gurugram, Haryana. She was then brought to Kolkata and on May 31, 2025, was remanded to judicial custody until June 13, 2025, by an Alipore Court. Her bail plea was rejected, and the police’s request for her custody was also turned down.
Accusations of “Selective Justice”:
Panoli’s arrest has sparked a heated debate, with many, including prominent figures like actress and politician Kangana Ranaut and Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, claiming it’s a case of “selective justice.” Their arguments largely revolve around these points:
- Disproportionate Action: Critics argue that while Panoli’s comments may have been offensive, the swift and stringent action taken against her, especially after she deleted the video and apologized, seems disproportionate.
- Comparison to Other Cases: Many point out instances where individuals, including politicians and public figures, have allegedly made equally or more offensive remarks against other religions or communities, yet haven’t faced similar immediate or severe legal consequences. This leads to the accusation that legal action is being selectively applied.
- Freedom of Expression vs. Religious Sentiments: The case highlights the ongoing tension between the right to freedom of expression and the need to protect religious sentiments in India.
- Political Motivation: Some political leaders have accused the ruling party in West Bengal (TMC) of “appeasement politics,” suggesting that the arrest was politically motivated to appease a particular community.
Police Stance:
Kolkata Police have countered these accusations, stating that all legal procedures were duly adhered to. They emphasized that multiple attempts were made to serve notice, and only after Panoli and her family were found absconding was an arrest warrant issued by a competent court. They have urged people to refrain from spreading unverified or speculative content.
Current Status:
Sharmishta Panoli is currently in judicial custody. Her legal team is expected to challenge the legality of her arrest and continue to pursue her bail. The case continues to be a subject of intense discussion on social media and in the political sphere, raising important questions about legal fairness and the boundaries of online speech in India.