The Delhi High Court on Friday rejected a petition filed by All India Students' Association (AISA) president Neha Bora challenging a police notice directing her to appear before a special executive magistrate (SEM) and explain why she should not be required to execute a peace bond.
"I am rejecting the writ petition at this juncture," Justice Subramonium Prasad said while pronouncing the judgment.
The court, however, issued certain directions to the SEM regarding the supply of relevant material to the student leader during the proceedings. A detailed copy of the judgment is awaited.
๐ฃ๐ผ๐น๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ป๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐๐ป๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐๐ก๐ฆ๐ฆ
The police notice, issued on October 17 under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), directed Bora to appear before the SEM on October 19 and show cause why she should not execute a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with one surety for maintaining peace during the period of inquiry.
Section 126 of the BNSS empowers an executive magistrate to initiate proceedings requiring a person to furnish a bond for keeping the peace when credible information suggests that the individual is likely to breach peace, disturb public tranquillity or commit an act that could lead to such a disturbance.
Bora was taken into preventive detention on October 16 while travelling to participate in the Cockroach Janta Party's (CJP) 'Lehra Do Tiranga' march at Connaught Place in Delhi. She was released the following day.
๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ ๐พ๐๐ฒ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐ ๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ฒ๐ด๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐
In her petition, settled by advocate Abhik Chimni, Bora contended that the police notice was vague, factually incorrect and unsupported by material establishing any likelihood of a breach of peace.
The proceedings before the SEM were based on allegations that Bora participated in sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16, repeatedly joined protests around Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders imposed under Section 163 of the BNSS, and instigated people to participate in the October 16 demonstration.
The student leader disputed the basis of the allegations and questioned the justification for initiating preventive proceedings against her.
๐๐ผ๐๐ป๐๐ฒ๐น ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ณ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฑ๐ ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ด๐ต๐ ๐๐ผ ๐ฝ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐๐
During Thursday's hearing, senior counsel appearing for Bora argued that citizens did not require permission to hoist the national flag and that advocating a change of government was not unlawful in a democracy.
The submissions were made in the context of the proposed 'Lehra Do Tiranga' march and the police action taken ahead of the demonstration.
Although the High Court declined to interfere with the notice at this stage, its directions concerning the supply of material to Bora will govern the proceedings before the SEM.
The detailed judgment is expected to clarify the scope of those directions and the court's reasons for rejecting the petition.