In the aftermath of the tragic terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam region, legal proceedings have been initiated against two well-known social media personalities for their allegedly provocative posts and commentary related to the incident.
The individuals under scrutiny are Shamita Yadav, popularly known by her online handle ‘Ranting Gola’, and Dr. Madri Kakoti, an assistant professor at Lucknow University who is active on social media under the name ‘Dr Medusa’. Both are known for their outspoken views and criticism of government policies.
Case Details
A police complaint has been filed against Yadav by advocate Amita Sachdeva, accusing her of “insulting the Manusmriti” and spreading “anti-national propaganda” in her video content criticizing the government’s handling of the Pahalgam incident. The complaint alleges that her statements amount to an attempt to incite disharmony and disrespect cultural sentiments.
In a separate case, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) leader Jatin Shukla has filed a First Information Report (FIR) against Dr. Kakoti. The charges include sedition, promoting enmity between groups, disturbing public peace, hurting religious sentiments, and violating provisions of the Information Technology Act. Dr. Kakoti’s satirical and critical commentary, shared in the days following the attack, is at the center of the controversy.
University Action
Following the FIR, Lucknow University has issued a show-cause notice to Dr. Kakoti. She has been given five days to respond and clarify her position on the posts flagged as objectionable by authorities. The university is said to be conducting an internal review of the matter.
Background
The Pahalgam terror attack, which took place earlier this month, claimed the lives of 26 people, including several tourists, and left many injured. Since the incident, government agencies have ramped up online surveillance and taken stern action against content that is perceived as inflammatory or critical of national security efforts.
Ongoing Debate
The legal action has sparked a broader debate on freedom of speech, censorship, and the fine line between dissent and sedition. Civil rights organizations and social media users are voicing concerns about the shrinking space for political expression in the country.
Conclusion
As investigations continue, both commentators face serious legal consequences. The developments have reignited discussions around the responsibility of public figures and content creators during times of national crisis.
