Bengal Police Actions and Sharmishta Panoli Controversy: An Examination of Potential Bias and Selective Targeting
Firing Up a Controversy: West Bengal Police and the Question of Selective Enforcement
The West Bengal Police have found themselves in hot waters due to accusations of double standards in their recent case management. Comparisons have been drawn to other worrying incidents, as concerns about selective law enforcement persist.
Two incidents have caught the public's attention: the seemingly ignored attack on Hindus in Siliguri and the swift arrest of student Sharmistha, accused of offensive comments against a specific religion from miles away in Gurugram.
Sharmistha, a 22-year-old law student, is currently in judicial custody, following her arrest by the Kolkata Police for remarks she made on social media. Meanwhile, the perpetrators of the Siliguri attack continue to roam free, further fueling allegations of selective law enforcement.
In a stark contrast, Wajahat Khan, the complainant in Sharmistha's case, has a history of controversial social media posts, allegedly mocking Hindu deities. Despite this, he remains free. The perceived lack of action against Khan has intensified accusations of religious bias within the West Bengal Police and the government led by Mamata Banerjee.
The Bar Council of India has voiced its concerns over the "selective pattern" of law enforcement in West Bengal, and the appointment of Inspector Naushad Akhtar as the investigating officer in Sharmistha's case has invited further scrutiny.
The political landscape is not left untouched, with accusations of appeasement politics flying thick and fast. For instance, the Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister, Pawan Kalyan, has shared an old video of Mamata Banerjee, adding fuel to the fire.
In today's digital age, such incidents have sparked heated debates, with the hashtag #ReleaseSharmistha trending on social media platforms. Dutch politician Geert Wilders has also spoken out, voicing concerns about freedom of speech.
While the roles of Wajahat Khan and Inspector Naushad Akhtar in the Sharmistha Panoli case are not fully documented, the perceived bias seems rooted in political contexts and accusations of selective law enforcement, rather than specific actions by these individuals.
The allegations of selective enforcement by the West Bengal Police extend beyond the Sharmistha Panoli case, as the general public questions why the perpetrators of the Siliguri attack remained unpunished, whereas Sharmistha, the law student, was swiftly arrested for her social media comments. this perceived bias has sparked heated debates within the realms of politics, with discussions about appeasement politics and selective law enforcement dominating the general-news landscape, thereby blurring the lines between crime-and-justice and politics.
