HC refuses to quash FIR against student over controversial post on ‘Op Sindoor’

The court said that bail can be considered in view of her status as a bright and young student, but the FIR will not be quashed

MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Friday refused to quash a First Information Report against a 19-year-old engineering student who was arrested in May 2025 for re-posting controversial posts on social media allegedly in support of Pakistan during India’s ‘Operation Sindoor’ that began on May 7, when Indian armed forces bombed nine terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir.

Bombay High Court at Fort (Anshuman Poyrekar/HT PHOTO)

Remarking that it is a serious matter, a division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad told the petitioner’s counsel that the court can grant her bail but not quash the FIR on the ground that she has tendered an apology or is a bright student. “This is a very serious thing. That’s fine, you are a bright child, but that cannot be a ground to quash the FIR,” the court said.

The student had approached the Bombay High Court after she was arrested on May 9. Seeking to quash the FIR lodged against her, she highlighted that she was rusticated from the college post the event and was later remanded in judicial custody.

During the hearing on Friday, her counsel submitted that the intention behind the post was not to hurt any sentiments. “She is a student and had merely re-shared a post on social media. When her friends told her that the post was inappropriate, she immediately deleted it. The person who originally created the post has not been booked, but only she has been proceeded against for having shared it. The fact remains that she deleted it promptly,” he said.

However, the court remained unconvinced and said, “Show us where the post is. What is the content of the post?” The court said that bail can be considered in view of her status as a young student, but the FIR will not be quashed. “Being a bright student is not a sufficient reason to quash the FIR. It is irrelevant that the post was later deleted. In fact, deletion may aggravate the incident,” said the court.

Lastly, the bench directed the Additional Public Prosecutor, Mankunwar Deshmukh, to submit the case diary in a sealed cover before the court. The matter was posted for final hearing after two weeks. According to the student’s petition, she had merely re-posted a message on Instagram from a user named ‘Reformistan’. The post read: “Without a single shred of evidence for Pak’s involvement at Pahalgam, the fascist Indian regime has just initiated war between 2 nuclear states by bombing 3 major civilian areas in Pakistan. This Hindutva-terrorism is right out of the Israeli playbook. India has been vehemently scapegoating Pak for its own failure in Occupied Kashmir due to India’s colonisation of the region. This fanatic Islamophobic terrorism that India has displayed is grotesque. May sense, justice, and humanity prevail. War serves no one.”

The petition states that, despite her re-posting the message without any ill intent, she had to face public humiliation, casteist abuse, and was branded with derogatory and communal terms both within and outside the college campus. “Although she deleted the post following the controversy, she was rusticated from the college, which claimed she had anti-national sentiments and posed a risk to the campus community and society,” it added.

On May 27, a division bench of justices Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan had come down heavily on the authorities and had termed her arrest as “shocking.” The court had directed the state to release her immediately and ordered the university to allow her to appear in the examination.

The student’s counsel submitted before the court that the college’s action appeared to have been influenced by prevailing political and public sentiments rather than any objective assessment of facts or adherence to due process. The situation was aggravated by the organisation of rallies and public demonstrations targeting the student, the lawyer said.