Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Madhu Kishwar in Video Controversy
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to academic Madhu Purnima Kishwar, who is embroiled in a legal controversy regarding a misleading social media post involving Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The case stems from a video shared by Kishwar on the social media platform X, in which she allegedly claimed that the individual receiving a facial massage was PM Modi. This claim was subsequently debunked by fact-checkers.
Following these developments, the Chandigarh police registered a criminal case against Kishwar, prompting her to seek anticipatory bail from the High Court. However, Justice Aman Chaudhary, presiding over the hearing on Friday, highlighted Kishwar’s lack of cooperation with the police, noting that she ignored multiple notices to appear for questioning.
Impact of the Misleading Post
Justice Chaudhary emphasized that Kishwar, being a well-known figure on social media and a scholar, should have been aware of the potential impact of her post. The tweet in question garnered significant attention, accumulating 174,000 views and attracting comments from other accused individuals and the public.
The court remarked that the video became widely circulated on various platforms, but it was Kishwar’s post that significantly amplified its reach and led to speculations about it resembling a Constitutional figure. This was further evidenced by her actions of retweeting related content, as outlined in the court’s reference to Annexure P-2.
Observations on Social Media Influence and Legal Implications
Justice Chaudhary also reviewed Kishwar’s other posts, which were alleged to be objectionable, and highlighted the difference between constructive criticism and posts that aim to malign or cause aspersions. The court noted that when influential individuals like Kishwar make such posts, the repercussions can be far-reaching, potentially causing social disharmony and threatening national unity and integrity.
More Read
The court concluded that the investigation is still in its early stages, with many aspects, such as the origin of the post and the involvement of other individuals, yet to be uncovered. This uncertainty, along with Kishwar’s role in the incident, led the court to deny her anticipatory bail.
Legal Arguments and Court’s Decision
Representing Kishwar were Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal and Sartej Singh Narula, who contended that her actions lacked malicious intent and that she was wrongfully implicated for merely retweeting the video. Conversely, Senior Advocate Amit Jhanji, representing the UT Police, argued that Kishwar actively participated in disseminating misinformation by downloading and uploading the video to her X account, thereby tarnishing the reputation of the Prime Minister.
This decision underscores the judiciary’s stance on the responsibilities of social media influencers and the legal consequences of spreading potentially harmful misinformation.
