Who is Sharmistha Panoli? Instagram influencer arrested over Operation Sindoor post as #ReleaseSharmistha trends
A 22-year-old law student from Pune,
Sharmistha Panoli
, was arrested in Gurugram by
Kolkata Police
on Friday night after a social media post allegedly containing derogatory remarks went viral. The video, posted on Instagram, triggered widespread backlash for allegedly insulting a religious community and the Prophet Muhammad, despite Panoli issuing an unconditional apology and removing the content.
Who is Sharmistha Panoli?
Sharmistha Panoli is a student of law at
Pune Law University
and a rising Instagram influencer with a large following. She gained visibility for speaking candidly on socio-political issues. On 14 May 2025, she posted a video in response to a Pakistani social media user who had questioned India's stance following the Pahalgam terror attack. In the clip, she sharply criticised Bollywood celebrities for remaining silent on Operation Sindoor—a major military response following the attack.
What did the viral video contain?
Panoli's video, initially intended as a political reaction, quickly spiralled into controversy. Several viewers, especially from Muslim communities in India and abroad, said she made offensive remarks about Islam and the Prophet Muhammad. The backlash was immediate and intense. Hashtags like #ArrestSharmistha began trending, and she reportedly received rape and death threats. Despite deleting the post and issuing an apology the following day, the situation had already escalated legally.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Clear, Compelling Writing in Seconds With This Desktop App
Grammarly
Install Now
Undo
She posted on social media on 15 May, 'I do hereby tender my UNCONDITIONAL APOLOGY. Whatever was put are my personal feelings and I never intentionally wanted to hurt anybody. So anybody is hurt, I'm sorry… Henceforth, I will be cautious in my public posts.'
Legal action and police statement
Multiple complaints were filed in Kolkata. Police say they attempted to serve legal notices to Panoli and her family, but she was allegedly untraceable. A senior police officer explained, 'The case pertains to an Instagram video by a woman named
Sharmistha
Panoli that hurt the
religious sentiments
of members of a particular community.'
Live Events
With no response to the notices, a court in Kolkata issued an arrest warrant. Panoli was detained in Gurugram and brought to Kolkata on transit remand. Police also seized her phone and laptop for forensic analysis, looking for evidence of further offensive or manipulated content.
On Saturday, the Alipore Court denied both police custody and bail, sending her to judicial custody until 13 June 2025.
In response to criticism of the arrest, Kolkata Police stated, 'All legal procedures were duly adhered to. All attempts were made to serve notice, but she was found absconding on every occasion. Consequently, a warrant of arrest was issued by the competent court… We urge all concerned to refrain from spreading unverified or speculative content and to rely on authentic sources.'
What charges were filed against her
According to legal sources, Sharmistha Panoli has been booked under the following sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS):
Section 196(1)(a): Promoting enmity between groups
Section 299: Outraging religious feelings
Section 352: Intentional insult to provoke breach of peace
Section 353(1)(c): Incitement to public mischief
Her lawyer, Mohammad Shamimuddin, has questioned the legality of her arrest, pointing out that multiple FIRs for the same offence contravene Supreme Court guidelines. He also claimed that no notice was served before the arrest, which violates Section 35(3) of the BNSS.
#ReleaseSharmistha: Kangana Ranaut defends her
Amid the uproar, actor and politician
Kangana Ranaut
voiced her support for Panoli on Instagram. She wrote:
'I agree that Sharmistha used some unpleasant words for her expression, but such words most youngsters use these days. She apologised for her statements and that should be enough. No need to bully and harass her further. She should be released immediately.'
Ranaut's remarks have divided public opinion further. While some support her call for leniency, others accuse her of downplaying hate speech.
Samajwadi Party MLA Abu Azmi weighed in on the matter, calling for a new law to punish those who hurt religious sentiments. Speaking to ANI, he said, 'A law should be formulated against such people which gives a punishment of at least 10 years.'
He drew parallels with cases involving controversial artists and writers, claiming selective enforcement of the law based on religion and political leanings.
Panoli's arrest has reignited a complex debate over
free speech
, religious sensitivity, and the responsibility of influencers online. While critics argue her remarks were provocative and deserved legal attention, others view the police action as disproportionate—especially after her public apology.
This case underscores a growing tension in India's digital space. Influencers now face increasing scrutiny not just from followers, but also from law enforcement and political entities. The question remains: where should the line be drawn between expression and offence?
For now, Panoli remains in judicial custody as legal proceedings unfold—and with it, a national conversation that shows no signs of dying down.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
8 minutes ago
- Mint
Terror-linked spying network busted in Punjab; YouTuber Jasbir Singh among key figures
Punjab DGP Gaurav Yadav tweets, "...State Special Operations Cell, Mohali has unearthed a critical espionage network linked to Jasbir Singh, a resident of village Mahlan, Rupnagar. Jasbir Singh, who operates a YouTube channel called 'Jaan Mahal,' has been found associated with PIO Shakir alias Jutt Randhawa, part of a terror-backed espionage network. He also maintained close contact with Haryana-based YouTuber Jyoti Malhotra (arrested for spying) and Ehsan-ur-Rahim alias Danish, a Pakistani national and expelled Pak High Commission official. Investigations have revealed that Jasbir attended the Pakistan National Day event in Delhi on Danish's invitation, where he met Pakistani Army officials and vloggers. He travelled to Pakistan on three occasions (2020, 2021, 2024), and his electronic devices contained multiple Pakistan-based numbers, now under detailed forensic scrutiny. After Jyoti Malhotra's arrest, Jasbir attempted to erase all traces of his communications with these PIOs to avoid detection. An FIR has been registered at SSOC, Mohali. Investigations are underway to dismantle the broader espionage-terror network and identify all collaborators..."
Hans India
11 minutes ago
- Hans India
Op Sindoor: Pakistan dossier reveals more targets hit
New Delhi: India struck deeper and wider inside Pakistan during Operation Sindoor than it officially acknowledged, a confidential Pakistani dossier on its internal military Operation 'Bunyan un Marsoos' has revealed. The dossier, accessed by NDTV, documents at least eight additional Indian airstrikes that were not previously disclosed by Indian defence authorities. Maps within the Pakistani dossier show Indian strikes on key cities such as Peshawar, Jhang, Hyderabad in Sindh, Gujrat in Punjab, Gujranwala, Bahawalnagar, Attock, and Chor -- locations that were not publicly mentioned by the Indian Air Force or the Director General of Military Operations during the press briefings held after the May 7 counteroffensive. The new details shed fresh light on the scale of Operation Sindoor and are being viewed as a significant factor behind Pakistan's urgent call for a ceasefire. Operation Sindoor was launched by India against the nine high-value terror hubs in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) following the dastardly Pahalgam terror attack, in which terrorists associated with an offshoot of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba killed 26 civilians, including one Nepali national.] The dossier contradicts Islamabad's earlier claims of having inflicted heavy losses on India and instead underscores the depth of damage suffered on Pakistani soil. Indian defence sources had already outlined the strike's magnitude, including the targeting of key terror hubs across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, in retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack. While initial briefings named several high-value targets, including the Jaish-e-Mohammed headquarters in Bahawalpur and the Lashkar-e-Taiba camp in Muridke, the revelation of deeper incursions suggests a strategic decision by New Delhi to allow Pakistan to reveal the full extent of the damage. The newly disclosed targets reportedly include both military and dual-use installations in urban centres far beyond the areas acknowledged by India, indicating a far more ambitious and calculated military operation than previously understood. Earlier satellite imagery released by Maxar Technologies had already confirmed extensive damage at several sites, corroborating Indian claims of precision strikes against terror infrastructure. The nine locations initially confirmed by India included Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Rawalakot, Chakswari, Bhimber, Neelum Valley, Jhelum, Chakwal, and the aforementioned terror bases. Despite India's clear statement that its actions were confined to targeting terror facilities, Pakistan responded with a barrage of drone and missile attacks against Indian civilian areas, religious infrastructure and military posts along the western front. India's counter-response included the targeting of 11 Pakistani air bases -- Nur Khan, Rafiqui, Murid, Sukkur, Sialkot, Pasrur, Chunian, Sargodha, Skardu, Bholari, and Jacobabad -- causing substantial military damage. This unprecedented escalation, lasting three days, eventually forced Pakistan to request a ceasefire, a move widely interpreted as a sign of the heavy losses it sustained.
Hindustan Times
15 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
CJI Gavai cautions judges against accepting govt posts, contesting polls
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai has sounded a strong note of caution against judges accepting government posts or contesting elections immediately after retirement, warning that such practices raise 'significant ethical concerns' and risk eroding public confidence in the judiciary's independence. 'If a judge takes up another appointment with the government immediately after retirement, or resigns from the bench to contest elections, it raises significant ethical concerns and invites public scrutiny,' underlined CJI Gavai, addressing a high-powered roundtable on judicial independence at the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on Tuesday. 'A judge contesting an election for a political office can lead to doubts regarding the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, as it may be seen as a conflict of interest or as an attempt to gain favour with the government,' he added. According to the CJI: 'The timing and nature of such post-retirement engagements,' he added, 'could undermine the public's trust in the judiciary's integrity, as it could create a perception that judicial decisions were influenced by the prospect of future government appointments or political involvement.' CJI Gavai emphasised that he and many of his colleagues had 'publicly pledged not to accept any post-retirement roles or positions from the government.' This, he said, was 'an effort to preserve the credibility and independence of the judiciary.' His remarks come amid long-standing debate over whether judges should be eligible for post-retirement positions -- a concern deepened in recent years by examples of Supreme Court and high court judges taking up roles offered by the executive soon after demitting office. Justice SA Nazeer, for instance, retired as a Supreme Court judge in January 2023. He was appointed as the governor of Andhra Pradesh, within 40 days of his retirement. Notably, justice Nazeer was part of the five-judge bench that decided the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi case in November 2019 handing over the Ayodhya land to the Hindu party. Justice Nazeer was the lone Muslim face on the Ayodhya bench presided by then chief justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi. Justice Gogoi was also nominated to the Rajya Sabha merely four months after retiring as the CJI in November 2019, sparking widespread criticism. Justice Gogoi was the second CJI to become a member of the Upper House. Former CJI Ranganath Misra was nominated to Rajya Sabha by the Congress and served from 1998 to 2004. Former Supreme Court judge Fathima Beevi was appointed Governor of Tamil Nadu from 1997-2001. Former CJI P Sathasivam was also appointed Governor of Kerala from 2014-2019. While Justice K Subba Rao contested the fourth Presidential elections, Justice Mohammad Hidayatullah became Vice President from 1979 to 1984. Similarly, justice Arun Mishra was appointed chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission within a year of retirement. Similarly, several high court judges have taken gubernatorial or tribunal posts immediately after leaving the bench. Judicial misconduct: The CJI also acknowledged a deeper malaise afflicting the judiciary -- instances of corruption and professional misconduct among judges, which he said severely tarnish the institution's legitimacy. 'Sadly, there have been instances of corruption and misconduct that have surfaced even within the judiciary. Such occurrences inevitably have a negative impact on public confidence, potentially eroding faith in the integrity of the system as a whole,' he lamented. Simultaneously, justice Gavai underscored: 'The path to rebuilding this trust lies in the swift, decisive, and transparent action taken to address and resolve these issues.' He added: 'In India, when such instances have come to light, the Supreme Court has consistently taken immediate and appropriate measures to address the misconduct.' He further said: 'Transparency and accountability are democratic virtues. In today's digital era, where information flows freely and perceptions are rapidly shaped, the judiciary must rise to the challenge of being accessible, intelligible, and answerable, without compromising its independence.' Though he did not mention any names, CJI Gavai's remarks come in the backdrop of the recent controversy surrounding high court judge Yashwant Varma, who has been indicted by a Supreme Court in-house inquiry panel over unaccounted cash found at his Delhi residence in March. In early May, the then CJI, Sanjiv Khanna initiated the process for the removal of justice Varma by writing to President Droupadi Murmu and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, stating that the allegations of recovery of cash at the judge's residence was serious and warranted initiation of proceedings for his removal. The development has once again placed judicial accountability under the spotlight, fueling calls for clearer standards and greater transparency. 'Legitimacy rooted in integrity': CJI Gavai's wide-ranging speech examined the core values underpinning judicial legitimacy, contrasting the judiciary's authority, which derives not from the ballot, but from public confidence, with the powers of the executive and legislature. 'In every democracy, the judiciary must not only dispense justice, but also be seen as an institution that deserves to hold truth to power,' said the judge, highlighting that the terms 'judicial legitimacy' and 'public confidence' are interconnected. He drew on the vision of Dr BR Ambedkar, who had warned during the Constituent Assembly Debates that the judiciary must remain 'independent of the executive' and 'competent in itself.' Article 50 of the Constitution, Gavai noted, mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive in public services, and mechanisms like fixed retirement ages, financial independence, and the collegium system were designed to uphold this principle. The CJI also reaffirmed the importance of judicial review and the judiciary's counter-majoritarian role. 'Courts must have the power of independent judicial review,' said justice Gavai, citing some Supreme Court of India's landmark decisions that reinforced the supremacy of constitutional values over political expediency. The Chief Justice further highlighted recent transparency initiatives by the Supreme Court, such as the live-streaming of Constitution Bench hearings and the public disclosure of judges' assets. 'These are significant steps,' he said, 'to bolster public confidence through transparency. Judges, as public functionaries, are accountable to the people.' While acknowledging that 'no system is immune to flaws,' he emphasised that 'solutions must never come at the cost of judicial independence.' 'Judges must be free from external control,' maintained the CJI, calling for renewed commitment to reasoned judgments, recusal practices in case of conflicts of interest and ethical leadership from the top.
