The Delhi High Court on Saturday turned down a petition by All India Students Association (AISA) president Neha Bora, who wanted a magistrate’s notice set aside. The notice asked her to give a ₹10,000 personal bond, backed by one surety, to keep the peace while an inquiry went on. Justice Subramonium Prasad, however, laid down some safeguards for the magistrate to follow.
Background
The notice was issued by a Special Executive Magistrate under Sections 126 and 130, read with Section 135(3), of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). These sections let a magistrate act early when there is information that a person may disturb public peace.
Bora says she was detained at Mandi House on October 16 after calling a peaceful gathering there. According to her, she was first taken to an unknown location and then to the RK Puram police station, where she spent the night. She was released around 6 AM and received the notice on October 18.
The notice referred to alleged sloganeering at Mandi House and repeated protests near Jantar Mantar despite orders under Section 163 of the BNSS restricting gatherings. It also said she had urged people to join a protest at Connaught Place.
Bora’s petition said the notice did not point to any material showing that a breach of peace was likely, nor did it name a specific event or time period. She denied calling for any protest at Connaught Place.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for her, said all her calls were for peaceful protest and that she had never encouraged violence. He added that asking for a change of government is not wrong in a democracy. He also noted that the magistrate who issued the notice is a police officer, and described the notice as mechanical.
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, for Delhi Police, said Sections 126 and 130 must be read together and that splitting them would weaken the purpose of preventing disorder. He argued that the magistrate’s satisfaction under Section 126 need not be proof, and that a preventive notice should not be struck down on technical grounds.
Justice Prasad said the process contained adequate safeguards and rejected the writ petition. He directed the magistrate to give Bora all the material relied on against her.
The magistrate was also asked to consider what Section 135 of the BNSS requires, including whether a bond can be demanded at the first stage or only if further incidents occur during the inquiry.
