The Delhi High Court will hear on October 22 a petition filed by All India Students’ Association (AISA) president Neha Bora challenging a Delhi Police notice asking her to execute a bond to maintain peace before a Special Executive Magistrate (SEM).
Justice Subramonium Prasad deferred the hearing on Wednesday at the request of Bora’s counsel. The petition seeks to quash the notice and asks the court to direct police not to take coercive action against her.
Bora has been involved in protests against alleged irregularities in the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
Police Notice Seeks ₹10,000 Personal Bond
The 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 explain why she should not execute a personal bond of ₹10,000 with one surety to maintain peace during the inquiry.
Section 126 empowers an executive magistrate to require a person to execute a bond when there is information suggesting that the person may breach the peace, disturb public tranquillity or commit an act likely to cause such a disturbance.
Bora was taken into preventive detention on October 16 while travelling to join the Cockroach Janata Party’s (CJP) ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march. She was released the following day.
Bora Calls Notice Vague and Factually Incorrect
In her petition, settled by advocate Abhik Chimni, Bora argued that the police notice was vague, factually incorrect and did not provide evidence to establish that she was likely to breach the peace.
The petition said the notice failed to identify a “period, occasion or event in relation to which breach is apprehended”.
It further alleged that the proceedings were a “colourable exercise of preventive powers to suppress peaceful dissent, in violation of Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 21 of the Constitution”.
These constitutional provisions protect freedom of speech and expression, the right to assemble peacefully and the right to life and personal liberty.
Police Cite Protests and Alleged Sloganeering
The proceedings before the SEM relate to allegations of sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16, repeated protests around Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, and allegedly instigating people to participate in a demonstration at Connaught Place.
Bora disputed the allegation that she had instigated people to join the demonstration at Central Park in Connaught Place.
“The Petitioner’s call and the incident alleged were different,” the plea stated, adding that she had called for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5 pm on October 16 and was detained from there.
The petition also questioned the reference to prohibitory orders, arguing that the notice did not identify a specific order or incident. It stated that an order dated August 23, 2026, did not cover Mandi House and exempted Jantar Mantar Road.
