Has Sharmistha Panoli's Counsel Requested the Calcutta HC for Her Safety in Judicial Custody?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The recent arrest of Sharmistha Panoli, a 22-year-old law student, has raised significant concerns regarding her safety in judicial custody. Her counsel has approached the Calcutta High Court, seeking assurances from the state government for her protection. As legal proceedings unfold, the implications of this case on freedom of speech and safety in custody remain crucial.
Key Takeaways
- Sharmistha Panoli has been arrested on serious charges.
- Her counsel emphasizes the need for safety in custody.
- The case raises concerns about freedom of expression.
- The High Court's decision reflects current legal challenges.
- Ongoing investigations may influence future legal proceedings.
Kolkata, June 3 (NationPress) The legal representative for Sharmistha Panoli, a 22-year-old law student recently apprehended by Kolkata Police on allegations of inciting religious sentiments and fostering discord, stated on Tuesday that he has formally requested the Calcutta High Court to instruct the state government to guarantee his client's safety and the provision of essential services during her time in judicial custody.
"My client has been threatened. She approached the police to file a complaint, yet no protective measures were offered. Consequently, she had to relocate to Gurugram. Therefore, I have urged the Calcutta High Court to mandate that the state government ensure her safety and basic services while she is in judicial custody," Md Samsuddin informed IANS after the vacation bench of the High Court denied her request for temporary bail.
An FIR was filed against Panoli at Garden Reach Police Station on May 15 after she posted an Instagram video with comments about 'Operation Sindoor,' which allegedly offended the religious sentiments of a specific community.
Facing backlash, the law student removed the video and publicly apologized. Nevertheless, following the FIR, the police issued her a notice, but it was ineffective as she had already gone into hiding in Gurugram.
Subsequently, a warrant for her arrest was issued, and she was apprehended by Kolkata Police from Gurugram on Saturday morning and returned to Kolkata on transit remand.
Samsuddin challenged the trial court's ruling last week that placed her in judicial custody until June 13. The case was heard by the vacation bench presided over by Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, who denied her request for temporary bail.
However, Samsuddin refrained from providing specific details regarding any direct security threats to Panoli while in judicial custody.
"I cannot disclose further information at this moment since the matter is currently under judicial review and is still being investigated," he stated.
Regarding the High Court's denial of her temporary bail, Samsuddin indicated that the preliminary stage of the investigation likely contributed to the rejection of his client's plea.
He also withheld comments on the possibility of moving to transfer the case outside of West Bengal, given the state government's opposition to her bail application.
Point of View
I believe that the safety of individuals in judicial custody is paramount. The concerns raised by Sharmistha Panoli's counsel reflect a broader issue regarding the treatment of individuals during legal proceedings. It is essential that the judicial system guarantees safety and rights, especially in cases that stir public sentiment. We must approach this matter with both caution and a commitment to justice.
NationPress
08/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What charges has Sharmistha Panoli faced?
Sharmistha Panoli has been arrested on charges of hurting religious sentiments and promoting disharmony and hatred.
Why did her counsel approach the Calcutta High Court?
Her counsel sought the High Court's intervention to ensure her safety and access to basic services during her judicial custody.
Where was Sharmistha Panoli arrested?
She was arrested in Gurugram and brought back to Kolkata by the police.
What is the significance of the FIR against her?
The FIR was registered due to an Instagram video she posted, which allegedly offended a particular religious community.
What was the outcome of her bail application?
The High Court denied her temporary bail, citing the ongoing investigation.
