Secularism Must Be a Two-Way Street – Pawan Kalyan on the Sharmistha Panoli Arrest
In India’s socio-political landscape, the concept of secularism has always been a cornerstone — and simultaneously, a contested ideal. A recent event has once again ignited national debate on the true nature of secularism and its application. This involves the arrest of a 22-year-old law student and influencer, Sharmistha Panoli, from West Bengal, and the subsequent comments made by Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister and Jana Sena Party leader, Pawan Kalyan.
The Sharmistha Panoli Controversy
Sharmistha Panoli, a young law student and social media influencer, posted a video online that criticized Bollywood celebrities for not publicly supporting India’s Operation Sindhoor, a military strike on terrorist camps across the Pakistan border. In her video, she allegedly used words considered religiously sensitive or offensive by some, sparking significant backlash.
Following complaints, the Kolkata Police arrested her, charging her under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (Indian Penal Code’s new version). She was then presented before a magistrate and placed in 14-day judicial custody.
Pawan Kalyan’s Reaction: Double Standards in Action?
Pawan Kalyan responded strongly on social media. While acknowledging that the student’s comments could have been offensive to some, he emphasized that she apologized and removed the video voluntarily. Despite this, the police acted swiftly to arrest her.
He questioned why similar action had not been taken against elected representatives from the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) who have made derogatory remarks against Sanatana Dharma (a broad term often used to describe traditional Hindu values and beliefs).
“Why is no action taken when Sanatana Dharma is insulted? Why are those MPs not arrested? Why are we silent when our beliefs are mocked?” – he asked, raising a series of rhetorical but piercing questions.
Kalyan further stated that secularism in India must not serve as a shield for some and a weapon against others. In his own words:
“Secularism should be like a two-way street. It must be fair and impartial to everyone.”
He emphasized that the nation is watching how West Bengal Police handle such cases and called for fair and equal treatment for all citizens, regardless of their background or beliefs.
Mamata Banerjee Responds
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee defended the arrest and pushed back against accusations of bias. She stated that the BJP was attempting to incite religious unrest in the state and claimed that their version of “Sanatana Dharma” was against the true principles of Hinduism.
Her statement shifted the focus from freedom of expression and equal law enforcement to larger political and ideological conflicts.
Is Indian Secularism Truly Balanced?
The incident has once again laid bare the fragile and often politically skewed implementation of secularism in India. In theory, secularism means that the State should not favor any religion — and must treat all citizens and belief systems equally.
But in practice, governments often walk a tightrope, trying to balance diverse vote banks while making selective interventions in matters of religion and free speech.
This selective enforcement raises serious questions about freedom of expression, rule of law, and whether justice is truly blind — or wears political lenses.
The Dangers of Double Standards
When individuals from one community are arrested promptly for certain remarks, while elected leaders from another community are allowed to make religiously offensive statements without consequence, it erodes public faith in secular governance.
It also creates a sense of victimhood and alienation among communities who feel targeted or neglected by the system. Over time, this can lead to polarization, social unrest, and a breakdown in communal harmony.
Freedom of Speech vs. Hate Speech – Finding the Balance
It is true that freedom of speech has limits — especially when speech incites hatred, violence, or discrimination. However, the law must not be applied selectively. What is considered hate speech in one context must also be recognized and punished in another, irrespective of who the speaker is.
If a student like Sharmistha can be arrested swiftly for offensive remarks, then public figures who mock any faith — whether it be Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, or any other — must also be held equally accountable.
Justice must be based on action, not on identity.
Pawan Kalyan’s Call for Equality
Pawan Kalyan’s message struck a chord with many who feel that India’s secular fabric is wearing thin. His words highlight a critical truth — that secularism must be impartial, not weaponized for political purposes.
His call to make secularism a two-way street is a demand for consistency, accountability, and genuine equality under the law. In a country as diverse as India, such consistency is not only desirable but absolutely essential for national unity.
The Role of the Judiciary and Civil Society
In cases like Sharmistha’s, it is also important for the judiciary to act as a counterbalance. Courts must ensure that arrests are not just symbolic actions to appease political sentiments, but rooted in genuine legal reasoning.
Likewise, civil society — including intellectuals, journalists, and students — must raise their voices when freedom of speech is threatened, regardless of who is targeted.
Conclusion
This incident has become a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over India’s commitment to secular values. The arrest of Sharmistha Panoli, Pawan Kalyan’s forceful reaction, and Mamata Banerjee’s political defense reflect a broader struggle between political narratives and constitutional principles.
If India is to remain a truly secular and democratic nation, it must ensure that laws are enforced fairly, and that citizens of all communities are treated equally under those laws.
Secularism must not become a selective privilege — it must be a fundamental right.
Only then can India uphold its founding ideals and protect the freedoms that make it a vibrant, diverse democracy.
