'Sharmistha went to jail, Ruchika got away with apology': How law decides who's guilty
The article examines the inconsistent legal treatment of two women, Sharmistha Panoli and Ruchika Singh, both accused of making derogatory remarks in public or online. It highlights the debate over what constitutes criminal abuse versus protected speech and questions the selective application of the law.
Why it matters
It raises critical questions about judicial consistency, freedom of speech, and the potential for political influence in the Indian legal system.
NEW DELHI: Last year it was Sharmistha Panoli, the law student jailed over a communal post on Operation Sindoor. This year it's Ruchika Singh, named in a zero FIR for allegedly abusing PM Narendra Modi at a Jantar Mantar protest. Different women, different videos, same old question: What does the law actually count as abuse, and what does it just let slide? The Sharmistha Panoli case Panoli was arrested from Gurgaon on May 30, 2025 by a Kolkata Police team, days after an FIR was lodged at Garden Reach police station on May 15 over an Instagram video containing what police called "disrespectful and derogatory remarks" targeting a religion. The post came in response to another user's comments on Operation Sindoor. Four FIRs had piled up against her in Kolkata by the time of her arrest; she had evaded a court summons before the warrant was executed.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in