Calcutta High Court Denies Bail to Influencer Sharmistha Panoli
The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday denied bail to Sharmistha Panoli, a 22-year-old law student and social media influencer from Pune, who was arrested for allegedly posting a video containing derogatory remarks about Islam and Prophet Muhammad.
Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday denied bail to Sharmistha Panoli, a 22-year-old law student and social media influencer from Pune, who was arrested for allegedly posting a video containing derogatory remarks about Islam and Prophet Muhammad.
Table of Contents
While the court refused her bail plea for now, it stayed all FIRs registered outside the Garden Reach police station jurisdiction, identifying the FIR there as the primary case.
Arrest Triggered Multiple FIRs Across States
Panoli was taken into custody last month by Kolkata Police in Gurugram, sparking nationwide backlash. Despite her public apology and deletion of the controversial video, she faced multiple FIRs under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly promoting enmity and inciting public unrest.
Bail Hearing Adjourned to June 5
The court, presided over by Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, ordered the state to submit the case diary by June 5, after which a final decision on her bail and the validity of the FIRs will be taken. The matter will then proceed under Justice Raja Basu Choudhury.
Court Cautions Against Provocative Content
The judge remarked during the proceedings,
Also Read: Pakistani TikTok Star Sana Yousaf Shot Dead in Islamabad; Police Launch Probe
“In our country, people of various religions live together. Therefore, it is important to be especially cautious before making any comment through any medium, to ensure that no one is hurt.”
The state police were also directed not to take further action on FIRs outside Garden Reach and to refrain from filing new FIRs on the same issue until the next hearing.
Legal, Social and Digital Implications
Panoli’s arrest has reignited national conversations about freedom of speech, digital responsibility, and the boundaries of religious sensitivity in a multicultural democracy.
Her legal team continues to argue that the video was taken out of context, while civil rights groups are divided over the implications of her arrest on individual liberties.
