Kolkata, June 3 (IANS) The counsel of Sharmistha Panoli, the 22-year-old law student arrested recently by Kolkata Police on charges of hurting religious sentiments and promoting disharmony and hatred, on Tuesday, said that he had pleaded to the Calcutta High Court to direct the state government to ensure his client’s safety and provision of basic services while is in judicial custody.

“My client had received threats. So she went to the police station and filed a complaint. However, the police did not provide her with any protection. So she had to go to Gurugram. So I have prayed to the Calcutta High Court so that the court directs the state government to ensure safety and basic services to my client while she is in judicial custody,” Md Samsuddin told IANS after a vacation bench of the High Court on Tuesday denied her ad-interim bail.

An FIR was registered against Panoli at Garden Reach Police Station on May 15 for posting an Instagram video, where she made some comments on ‘Operation Sindoor’ that had reportedly hurt the religious sentiments of a particular community.

In the face of strong criticism, the law student deleted that video. She also tendered a public apology for the matter. However, based on the FIR registered, the police first sent her a notice, which failed since she had gone into hiding in Gurugram by then.

Thereafter, an arrest warrant was issued against her, and finally, she was arrested from Gurugram by Kolkata Police on Saturday morning and was brought back to Kolkata on transit remand on the same day.

Samsuddin approached the High Court, challenging the trial court’s order last week sending her to judicial custody till June 13. The matter came up for hearing before the vacation bench of Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, who denied ad-interim bail to Panoli.

However, Samsuddin refused to give more specific details on whether there was any specific input security threat for Panoli while she was in judicial custody.

“I cannot say anything about this right now since the matter is sub-judice and an investigation is on,” he said.

On the High Court denying her ad-interim bail, Samsuddin said that since the investigation was at the initial stage, that was probably the reason for the rejection of his client’s plea.

He also refused to comment on whether that was a chance that he might move a plea to transfer the case out of West Bengal, considering the state government had been opposing her bail plea.

–IANS

src/vd