New Delhi: All India Students’ Association (AISA) president Neha Bora Monday challenged before
Delhi High Court a police mandate asking her to execute a bond before a special executive magistrate for “keeping peace.”
Bora, who has been at the forefront of recent protests against alleged irregularities in
Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, is likely to seek an urgent hearing in HC as the matter is yet to be listed. Her petition seeks quashing of the notice and directions to the police not to take any coercive action against her.
The notice, issued on Oct 17 under section 126 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), asked her to appear before the magistrate on Oct 19 and show cause why she should not execute a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with one surety “for keeping peace for a period of enquiry.”
As highlighted by
TOI earlier, Section 126 empowers a a special executive magistrate to require a person to execute a bond for keeping the peace if there is credible information that he or she is likely to commit a breach of peace, disturb public tranquillity, or commit a wrongful act that may cause such a disturbance.
Bora was taken into preventive detention on Oct 16 while she was on her way to participate in Cockroach Janata Party (CJP)’s ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march at Connaught Place’s Central Park.
She was released a day later.
In her plea, Bora argues the police notice is vague, factually incorrect and contains no material or information to substantiate the “likelihood” of breach of peace. It does not disclose a “period, occasion or event in relation to which breach is apprehended”, the plea argues, as it asserts that the proceedings are a “colourable exercise of preventive powers to suppress peaceful dissent, in violation of Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 21 of Constitution”.
The petition submitted that the proceedings initiated by police before the magistrate are based on alleged incidents of sloganeering at Mandi House on Oct 16, repeated protests around Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under section 163 of BNSS, and instigating people to participate in a protest in CP on Oct 16. “The impugned notice rests on a prima facie incorrect fact, namely that the petitioner instigated people to participate in the demonstration at Central Park, CP on Oct 16. The petitioner’s call and the incident alleged were different. The petitioner called for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5.00 pm on Oct 16, and it is a matter of record that she was detained from Mandi House,” Bora’s petition said.
“That the alleged disregard of ‘prohibitory orders 163 BNSS’ in the notice does not identify any specific prohibitory order and incident. In fact, the only order on record dated Aug 23 does not extend to Mandi House and exempts Jantar Mantar Road,” according to the plea.