AISA President Neha Bora Moves Delhi HC to Quash Rs 10,000 Peace Bond Notice
AISA President Neha Bora challenges a Rs 10,000 peace bond notice in the Delhi High Court, alleging arbitrary use of preventive powers.
Neha Bora, the President of the All India Students’ Association (AISA), has approached the Delhi High Court to challenge a notice issued by a Special Executive Magistrate. The notice directs her to explain why she should not be required to execute a personal bond of Rs 10,000, with one surety, to maintain peace during an ongoing inquiry.
In her petition, Bora has sought the quashing of the notice issued on October 17 under Sections 126 and 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. She has further requested the court to stop any coercive action by the authorities following the issuance of this notice.
The Core of the Legal Battle
The legal dispute stems from a notice requiring Bora to appear before the Special Executive Magistrate on October 19 to show cause under Section 135(3) of the BNSS. Bora’s petition argues that the notice is fundamentally flawed and vague, claiming it fails to provide any concrete evidence or material to justify the fear of a breach of peace.
According to the petition, the authorities have not specified the exact period, occasion, or event where a breach of peace is anticipated, making the notice an arbitrary exercise of preventive powers.
Allegations vs. Reality
The notice issued to the AISA President cites several reasons for the bond, including:
- Sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16.
- Repeated protests around Jantar Mantar in defiance of prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS.
- Allegations that Bora instigated a demonstration at Connaught Place on the same day.
Bora has strongly disputed the claims regarding the Connaught Place event. She contends that her call was specifically for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5 pm on October 16. She further stated that she was detained from Mandi House and that the gathering she organized was entirely distinct from the demonstration mentioned in the official notice.
Questions Over Prohibitory Orders
The petition raises serious questions about the reliance on Section 163 of the BNSS. Bora argues that the authorities failed to identify which specific order or incident was allegedly violated. She pointed out that an order dated August 23, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police (Sub-Division Parliament Street), did not cover the Mandi House area and explicitly exempted Jantar Mantar Road.
While that August 23 order prohibited assemblies of five or more people, slogans, and speeches across the sub-division for 60 days (until October 21), Bora maintains that her actions did not fall under these restrictions.
Detention and Constitutional Rights
The petition provides a detailed account of Bora's detention on October 16. She alleges she was picked up from Mandi House around 5:30 pm, taken to an undisclosed location, and then moved to the RK Puram police station. She was held overnight and released around 6 am on October 17, only for the peace bond notice to follow shortly after.
Bora has invoked Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution, citing her fundamental rights to personal liberty, peaceful assembly, and freedom of speech and expression. She argues that preventive proceedings cannot be triggered simply because a person participates in or calls for a peaceful protest.
Context of the Protests
This legal move comes amidst the "Lehra Do Tiranga" march and demonstrations scheduled for October 16. These protests were centered around the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise, with protesters demanding accountability from Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. Other activists, including Abhijeet Dipke of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), were also detained ahead of the planned march.
Bora has expressed concern that if the court does not grant relief, she may be forced to execute the bond, and any subsequent non-compliance could lead to her detention.