Delhi HC hears AISA president Neha Bora's plea against personal bond notice

The Delhi High Court heard a petition by Neha Bora, president of the All India Students' Association (AISA). The petition challenges a notice from a Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) asking her to furnish a personal bond of Rs 10,000 and maintain peace.

Senior counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Bora, argued that the notice is unconstitutional and untenable in law. He said Bora had not called for any protest at Connaught Place.

The court put a question to her counsel. The judges asked: "Is the issue you are raising in the High Court under Article 22 of the Constitution not the magistrate's responsibility under Section 135(3)? The very purpose of this notice is that, during the inquiry, the magistrate be satisfied as to why a bond should not be taken. Should we hear this in detail, or confine ourselves to the Section 126 notice and its grounds?"

In reply, Sankaranarayanan said: "This notice is merely a copy-paste exercise. A thorough inquiry is necessary before a personal bond is demanded. A seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court has also held the same. Until the inquiry is complete, a magistrate cannot ask for a bond."

The counsel also said protests were being held across the country against government decisions. According to him: "My client (Neha Bora) never spoke of inciting violence. Her stand was entirely peaceful. She was demanding reforms and appealing to people through social media to gather."

Giving the dates, he said Bora held a press conference at the Press Club on October 15. On October 16, protesting the sudden decision not to notify Jantar Mantar, she had called an evening gathering at Mandi House. The counsel said: "These posts do not make out incitement to violence, no law was broken and the peace was not breached."

Sankaranarayanan reiterated that the Connaught Place (CP) protest was organised by another organisation. Bora had called only for the Mandi House protest.

The notice refers to "hoisting the national flag without permission". According to the counsel, no permission is needed to hoist the Tricolour. He also pointed out that the magistrate (SEM) who issued the notice is himself a police officer (ACP), and that the process was begun at the instance of senior officers.