India has freedom of speech. Yes, India has freedom of speech as long as you use it to spew venom against Hinduism. India has freedom of speech as long as you berate your own country. This freedom of speech, however, ceases to exist once you intentionally or unintentionally offend the perennially offended ‘minority’ community—Muslims. Once you have offended those who must not be offended, there is no scope for redemption, no apology, no regret, and no law can protect you from wrath of bloodthirsty Islamists. Sharmishta Panoli, 22-year-old girl has come into the radar of Indian Islamists over an Instagram video against Pakistan, which ended up offending ‘Indian Muslims.’
Sharmishta Panoli, a law student from Symbiosis Law School in Pune, was arrested by Kolkata Police on 30th May 2025, from Haryana’s Gurugram. The arrest came after Islamists unleashed an online mob against the Hindu influencer, who issued rape and death threats including the Islamist-favourite ‘Gustakhe Nabi ki ek saza, Sar tan se juda’ threat. The Indian Muslim social media users also began tagging the police, demanding her arrest.
Instead of chasing the Muslim social media users who doxxed and gave ‘Sar Tan se Juda’ threats to the Hindu influencer, the Mamata Banerjee’s police force have arrested Sharmistha instead.
The controversy began on 14th May when a Pakistani Muslim handle attempted to whitewash the massacre of 24 Hindus during the Pahalgam terror attack. Islamic terrorists had confirmed religious identity of the victims before shooting them dead. An enraged Sharmishta mocked the Pakistani Muslim handle for believing that India started a war without any reason and asked if she had heard of Pahalgam and other Pakistan-sponsored terror attacks.
Sharmishta further asked if Indian forces should just sit and do nothing about these terror attacks. The video was taken out of context by Pakistani and Indian Muslims alike to allege insult to Islam and Prophet Muhammad.
The Hindu influencer soon deleted her video and even tendered an unconditional apology. However, Islamists have an undeclared ‘never apologise, never forgive’ rule, which essentially means that when they insult Hindu gods or hurt sentiments of other non-Muslim communities, they are not supposed to apologise, rather, either double down or play victim, on the contrary, if a Hindu or a non-Muslim even criticises Islamic traditions, let alone, making derogatory remarks, then there is no scope for apologise and move on.
But what emboldens Islamists to go after anyone they declare a ‘blasphemer’ or ‘Gustakh-e-Nabi’, so much so, that no action is taken against those who literally issue threats of beheading someone for their words, while accused person, despite apologising, is subjected to harassment of all sorts and is arrested.
As unfortunate and outrageous as it sounds but it is the judiciary, the system and Muslim-appeasing socio-political ecosystem that fuels the intransigence of petulant Islamists.
On 3rd June 2025, the Calcutta High Court rejected the bail plea of Sharmishta Panoli, saying “heavens will not fall” if the ad-interim bail plea is not accepted and the case is heard later for bail.
While hearing a plea against the trial court’s remanding her to 14-day judicial custody, Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee said that the video in question was seen and that sentiments of Muslims were hurt. He added that while the court wants freedom of speech, it does not mean that sentiments of others can be hurt.
“This video was made on social media, it was heard. This incident has led to a section of people’s sentiment being hurt. We have freedom of speech but that doesn’t mean you will go on to hurt others. Our country is diverse, with all persons. We must be cautious. So day after tomorrow. Heavens will not fall,” Justice Chatterjee said as the petitioner’s counsel apprised the court that Sharmishta is a student with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and staying in jail is a problematic for her.
The court deduced that Sharmishta’s video hurt the sentiments of Muslims, however, what about those issuing Sar tan se juda threats to the young girl. What about the rape and death threats she continues to receive? Islamists are most of the time offended, and otherwise ready to get offended, but does that mean a person’s life can be put at risk, or ruined, especially after she has apologised and deleted the video in question? Why is it that courts take sentiments of Muslims unrealistically seriously, however, the same seriousness disappears when Hindu sentiments are hurt?
The Sharmishta Panoli case reminds of the 2022 Nupur Sharma case. In May 2022, Nupur Sharma was one of the panellists on the Time Now show along with Taslim Ahmed Rehmani on the Shivlinga found at the Gyanvapi disputed structure site. During the debate, Rehmani used derogatory language against Bhagwan Shiv that irked then-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. Sharma countered her and questioned how would he react if she used the same language for Islam and the Prophet.
Though it was a counter statement, Alt News’ co-founder Mohammed Zubair found it to be the perfect opportunity to ruin Sharma’s life. He cunningly trimmed Rehmani’s remarks that came before Sharma’s counter remarks and presented as if Sharma was insulting Prophet Mohammed. The propaganda against Sharma worked and it sparked an international outrage.
Regardless of the fact that what Sharma said about the Prophet’s marriage to the 9-year-old Ayesha, which is mentioned in multiple Islamic hadiths, Nupur Sharma was branded as a ‘blasphemer’, with Islamic organisations openly declaring that she should be murdered.
Following the witch-hunt against Sharma, there were protests and riots across the country carried out by Sar tan se juda shrieking Islamist mobs. People who supported Sharma were threatened by Islamists online and offline. FIRs were filed not only against Sharma but also against those who supported her.
Not to forget, Kanhaiya Lal, a Hindu tailor from Udaipur, Rajasthan, and Umesh Kolhe, a businessman from Maharashtra’s Amravati, were brutally murdered by Islamists for simply supporting Sharma. Kanhaiyalal was beheaded by two Riaz and Ghous Mohammed, for sharing a post in support of Sharma. The jihadis recorded a video after brutally murdering the Hindu man and raised sar tan se juda slogans while justifying their act. Ironically, the Muslim man who informed the killers about the Hindu tailor’s presence in his shop, was granted bail by Rajasthan High Court last year.
Similarly, bloodthirsty Islamists brutally hacked chemist Umesh Kolhe, 54, to death while he was on his way back home after shutting his store in Maharashtra.
Umesh Kolhe and Kanhaiyalal had not even said or posted anything against any religion but only extended support to Sharma who was at the receiving end of a barrage of rape threats, death threats, Sar tan se juda threats and whatnot.
When Nupur Sharma approached the Supreme Court seeking clubbing of FIRs against her, the two-judge bench that heard the matter seemed to have already formed an opinion against her based on the disinformation and misleading propaganda running in media and on social media. Justice Surya Kant, in his oral observations, blamed Nupur Sharma for what was happening in the country.
Blaming Nupur Sharma for the Islamist mob violence across the country as well as killing of Kanhaiyalal and Umesh Kolhe, for stating something even Muslim scholars and scriptures state, the Supreme Court judge had said, “You have ignited the whole country. You possess a loose tongue. Power has gone to your head. You should apologise to the nation.”
While Sharma had already apologised, much like it is happening in the case of Sharmishta Panoli, her apology, however heartfelt, could not satiate the quench of bloodthirsty Islamists. For Islamists, the only appropriate punishment for those who ‘hurt’ their religious sentiments is when either they do sar tan se juda of the ‘blasphemer’ or the court outrightly orders their hanging, nothing in between.
Although, the Calcutta High Court’s remarks in Sharmishta’s case were not as scathing as the ones made in Nupur Sharma’s case, there is a disturbing pattern. The pattern of advertently or inadvertently justifying Islamist outrage no matter how violent and destructive by outrightly blaming the accused person.
While Islamists mobs cry that since the so-called ‘Gustakh blasphemer’ has displayed the temerity of actually holding an opinion, that person needs to be hanged, the courts also make remarks that suggest that even they agree that the person should be punished and conveniently blame them. This, however, does serve the purpose of upholding the law, rather, it only serves the purpose of lending legitimacy to the street veto of the Islamists. In a nutshell, it is like telling the accused person, “Ab gustakhi karoge, toh ye sab [threats, riots and even killings] to hoga hi”.
This, however, is not confined to one Nupur Sharma or Sharmishta Panoli, there have been numerous cases wherein accusations of offending the ever-offended Muslim sentiments resulted in violence, riots and killings of Hindus. The 2019 Kamlesh Tiwari killing, the 2022 Kishan Bharwad killing are among many such cases wherein Islamists deemed certain comments or social media posts ‘blasphemous’ and resorted to silencing the ‘Gustakh’ and drawing joy from having taught Kafir a lesson.
It is high time, however, for the courts, politicians and general public to understand that Islamists are perennially offended and can resort to violence using any real, imaginary, assumed or trivial excuse to initiate threats and violence against people. Be it Hindu processions passing in front of mosques, Hindus playing bhajans during their festivals, or putting up religious flags or even celebrating a cricket match victory in ‘Muslim area’, or a movie on a Hindu historical figure who endured Islamist barbarism and chose death over conversion to Islam, can offend Islamists enough to resort to stone pelting, arson and killing. All in the name of ‘hurt sentiments’.
While upholding communal harmony and even laying emphasis on protecting religious sentiments is not wrong, however, by validating claims of ‘hurt sentiments’, especially of those who are essentially ready to do mob justice with the accused, if courts fail to punish the person and call for the accused’s beheading, courts only embolden Islamists.
Political parties supporting Islamists to appease their Muslim votebank, as seen in the case of Sharmishta, wherein TMC has gone all out in support of Islamists, courts putting these curbs on speech embolden those who get offended at the drop of a hat and now day by day they are reducing the space for free speech.
