Yeah, saw a bunch of OSINT handles pick up the story; even posting SS of seething by mullahs and jihadis. That being said, merely sharing a mere video (that has been already shared globally) cannot be reason enough to kick out a student - it just won't stand the test of law in any court (
@Azaad can elaborate). Authroties simply chickened out after jihadis took it to the streets and are trying to brush it under the carpet for the time being.
Reminds me of a similar incident involving an RSS guy who apparently shared some 'inflammatory' posts 'dehumanizing' commies and mullahs while pursuing some courses (masters?) in a certain humanities discipline in JU, Kolkata (humanities disciplines are considered the den of commies in JU). Dude was initially suspended, harassed and boycotted by fellow students but was allowed to sit for all his semester exams (after he moved to courts) and earned his degree with zero consequences.
No expert on the topic but I'd attempt to answer your query. To begin with I'd draw your attention to the Nupur Sharma case. Since the events were broadcast live on TV, the evidence is that much clear & undisputed . She quoted Islamic scriptures to underline her case. Ignoring the brouhaha which followed , the judiciary's job is to verify whether what she said was in accordance with the scriptures she's quoted. If yes, the blasphemy case collapses.
In case of the student from NIT Srinagar, it depends on what's he circulated. Using the Nupur Sharma case as a template if what he's circulated can be proven as genuine as per Islamic scriptures & traditions, the case would go the same way as the Nupur Sharma case. However if discrepancies are found, then the charge of spreading inflammatory material comes into effect since he hasn't created the material , merely circulated it. It also depends on the sections of the IPC & CrPC he's charged with. The stiffer the charges the more severe the sentence.
It's been nearly 1.5 yrs since the Nupur Sharma imbroglio broke out, court hearings still haven't commenced & in her case since the charges were filed in multiple states , in all probability the SC will hear the case or designate an appropriate lower court to hear the matter. In the case of the student, the matter could well go on trial at the Sessions Court, then the HC comes into play followed by the SC assuming either party appeals the case. Even if we were to consider the matter is to be decided at the Sessions Court level with no appeals by either parties in higher courts , he still has to undergo the process of trial. Assuming the case falls flat, the entire process is still punishment enough.
Hopefully as far as his academics are concerned, NIT either transfers him to an NIT in the neighbouring state else permits him to leave college, issuing him a TC to pursue his engineering studies in a pvt college. The case will drag on. That's the best case scenario. Unfortunately for him, his ordeal has just begun. The first task would be to get bail which given the charges aren't easy & there'd be a genuine threat to his life which would weigh in his favour for bail & possibly an appeal to shift the case out.
A word about the judiciary particularly contemporary judiciary. In most such cases, the judiciary is loathe to judge these cases where there's a religious controversy involved especially concerning Islam .They won't admit it , but the judiciary is intimidated in such cases. At any rate they see it as a thankless activity they'd rather avoid hearing if it were up to them.
Justice Pardiwala's reaction in court to Nupur Sharma during her bail application & plea to combine all such cases from different police stations in different states in to one matter for a common hearing is there for everyone to see. Fortunately the severe backlash the judge received on SM & the pretence he later adopted in the media at least tells the judiciary that they won't get a free pass from the majority community in this matter which in any case is denied them by the minority community.