New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Thursday said it would pass an order October 23 on All India Students’ Association (AISA) president Neha Bora’s plea challenging a police notice asking her to execute a “peace” bond before a special executive magistrate.
Justice Subramonium Prasad, after hearing the counsel for Bora and police for nearly three hours, reserved the order on the petition.
“I will pass order tomorrow 6 PM,” the judge said.
Bora, who has been at the forefront of protests against the alleged irregularities in the Election Commission’s special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, has sought quashing of the notice and directions to the police not to take any coercive action against her.
During the arguments, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Bora, submitted that there was no application of mind by the SEM (special executive magistrate) while issuing the notice and that it was a mere cut and paste job.
While referring to the Delhi Police notice which said that Bora hoisted the national flag without seeking permission, the counsel submitted that citizens don’t need permission to hoist the national flag.
“Question is does this (notice) have substance? We don’t need permission to hoist the national flag. They need a class on law,” Sankaranarayanan said.
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, representing Delhi Police, raised objection on the maintainability of Bora’s petition.
He contended that at the time of issuance of notice, overwhelming material was available before the SEM who has applied his mind.
The notice, issued on October 17 under Section 126 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), asked the student leader to appear before the SEM October 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”.
Section 126 empowers the SEM to enforce such bond signing if there is credible information that a person is likely to breach peace, disturb public tranquillity, or commit a wrongful act that may cause disturbance.
Bora was taken into preventive detention October 16 when she was on her way to join the Cockroach Janta Party’s (CJP) ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march. She was released October 17.
In her petition, settled by lawyer Abhik Chimni, Bora said that 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 argued, and asserted 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 the Constitution”.
The proceedings before the SEM are based on allegations of sloganeering at Mandi House October 16, repeated protests around Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under section 163 of BNSS, and instigating people to participate in a protest in Connaught Place October 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, Connaught Place 16.10.2026. The petitioner’s call and the incident alleged were different. The petitioner called for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5:00 PM 16.10.2026, and it is a matter of record that she was detained from Mandi House,” the 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 23.08.2026 does not extend to Mandi House and exempts Jantar Mantar Road,” it added.
