Influencer Sharmistha Panoli's health worsens in jail; lawyer Md Samimuddi alleges denial of basic rights
KOLKATA: Social media influencer Sharmistha Panoli's lawyer, Md Samimuddi, reports her deteriorating health conditions at Alipore Women's Correctional Home following her arrest on May 30 for allegedly hurting religious sentiments.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Samimuddin states, "We are trying our best to get her out of jail before June 13. We will discuss the matter today. We will decide in one or two days about what to do...At Alipore Women's Correctional Home, proper hygiene is not being maintained around her, and she is unwell. She has kidney stones. She is not being given access to newspapers and magazines. Today we have filed a petition in the court so that she gets access to her basic rights.
.. Sharmistha is innocent. We are trying our best to get out on bail...".
On June 1, Bar Council of India Chairman and Supreme Court Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra criticised the arrest of law student Sharmishtha Panoli, describing it as unjust and an infringement on free expression.
Mishra pointed out that the Bengal government and Kolkata Police have shown bias in law enforcement, targeting specific community members whilst ignoring serious offences by others.
On June 2, NGO president Prasun Maitra from North 24 Parganas filed a complaint against Wazahat Khan Qadri, who had initially filed the FIR against Panoli. Maitra accused Wazahat of posting anti-Hindu content on X.
Kolkata Police arrested the 22-year-old Pune law student in Gurugram for allegedly offensive content regarding
. She removed the Instagram video and apologised on X before being placed in judicial custody until June 13.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The Alipore Court ordered a 14-day judicial custody when Panoli appeared on Saturday.
Kolkata Police reported unsuccessful attempts to serve legal notices to Panoli and her family, who allegedly absconded. The court subsequently issued an arrest warrant, leading to her apprehension in Gurugram. Although Panoli had removed the contentious video and apologised on May 15, the Garden Reach Police Station processed the FIR regarding religious sentiment violation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Group insolvency framework: When one is not for all
The principle of separateness is no minor technicality. It lies at the heart of company law. The landmark 1896 ruling by the British House of Lords, in Salomon vs Salomon & Co, established that once incorporated, a company acquires its own legal identity, distinct from its shareholders, directors, or affiliates. This was more than a formalism; it unleashed the modern economy, shielding personal assets from business risks and allowing capital to move freely. India's Supreme Court has affirmed this on many instances, underscoring that corporate separateness is not a legal fiction to be set aside for convenience, but a deliberate construct governing credit, liability, and risk. The IBC reflects this. It treats companies as distinct legal persons, with debts, defaults, and proceedings that are all individually determined. Section 3(7) defines a 'corporate person' in individual terms—one corporation at a time. Section 5(8), which defines 'financial debt,' presupposes a direct relationship between debtor and creditor, not a complex web of inter-corporate obligations. And from Section 6 onwards, the entire resolution mechanism is built around initiating proceedings against 'a corporate debtor'—not a group, conglomerate, or an economic cluster. Of course, the notion that each company is a sealed legal island has its exceptions. Courts in India and abroad have occasionally 'pierced' the corporate veil—especially when the structure is used to commit fraud or evade the law. As early as 1933, Lord Denning remarked that courts could 'pull aside the corporate veil' to see the true actors behind it (Gilford Motor Co vs Horne). Indian courts have likewise reaffirmed that corporate identity is not a shield for misconduct. But these are the exceptions to the rule, triggered by fact-specific abuse, not tools for convenience or policy innovation. The call for a group insolvency framework stems from real-world frictions, not just theory. Consider the Srei Group, where both the parent and its subsidiary were forced into parallel insolvency proceedings, despite shared cash flows, cross-guarantees, and overlapping liabilities. This created a procedural quagmire: creditors filed claims in both forums, there was confusion over ownership of assets, and value was steadily lost. The Videocon case posed an even starker dilemma. Thirteen companies, all functionally run as one business, were admitted into distinct CIRPs—only to be later resolved collectively by judicial innovation, not legislative design.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Collegium system reforms can't be at cost of judicial independence: CJI
Amid a clamour for legislative revamp of the judges-selecting-judges system, fuelled by Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar's statements, CJI B R Gavai has said no reform in the collegium system could be at the "cost of judicial independence" and that judiciary should retain its primacy in appointments to Supreme Court and high courts. At a round-table in UK Supreme Court on Tuesday evening, CJI Gavai said, "There may be criticism of the collegium system, but... judges must be free from external control." CJI said SC had struck down National Judicial Appointments Commission Act in 2015 as the law attempted to dilute judiciary's independence by giving primacy to the executive in court appointments. Unwarranted interference led to collegium system, says CJI Tracing the evolution of the collegium system through two SC judgments in 1993 and 1998, the CJI said the executive had the final say in appointment of judges to Supreme Court and HCs till 1993 and that system saw two senior-most judges of SC getting superseded in the appointment of CJIs (both by the govt headed by Indira Gandhi) in breach of established traditions. He said the collegium system evolved as judiciary's response to the executive's excesses and unwarranted interference in appointments to constitutional courts. As per the two judgments concerned, the collegium was to act in unanimity and its decision was to be final, Justice Gavai said, adding that this "sought to ensure independence of judiciary, reduce executive interference and maintain judiciary's autonomy in its appointments". Quoting B R Ambedkar's words - "our judiciary must both be independent of the executive and must also be competent in itself" - the CJI said the fact that constitutional courts drew salaries from the Consolidated Fund of India made judges independent of the executive. Referring to Kesavananda Bharati judgment of 1973 that propounded the basic structure doctrine by a 13-judge bench through seven to six majority, CJI Gavai said, "This ruling established a significant judicial precedent, affirming that certain fundamental principles, such as democracy, rule of law, and the separation of powers, are inviolable and cannot be altered."
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Chhattisgarh government nod for policy to promote tourism in tribal-dominated areas
The Chhattisgarh Cabinet on Wednesday approved a homestay policy to promote tourism in rural and tribal-dominated areas, including the Maoism-hit Bastar division. The 'Chhattisgarh Homestay Policy 2025-30' was approved in a Cabinet meeting chaired by Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai and comes at a time when security forces are carrying out anti-Naxal operations in the Bastar region. Bastar and Sarguja are the two tribal-dominated regions of the State and are known for their natural beauty. A government official said the homestays would offer a rural life experience to visitors and highlight the regional characteristics of tribal areas, local culture, art and craft. The official added that the policy will benefit the locals by offering them a business opportunity to increase their income, which will play a pivotal role in achieving the goal of 'Vocal for Local' and the development of rural tourism. Another major decision taken during the meeting was the transfer of government employees. Under the Transfer Policy 2025, there will be a window of 11 days for transfers at the State level. Under this policy, transfers will be approved by Ministers of the departments concerned from June 14 to 25. No transfer would be allowed after June 25. The official, however, said that emergency cases could be considered through coordination and added that the applications for transfers would be accepted from June 6 to 13.
