The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the notice issued by the Greater Noida Executive Magistrate under Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita against a student for allegedly campaigning for participation in the student protests proposed by the Cockroach Janata Party.
The Court asked how the Executive Magistrate could issue the notice when the Supreme Court has quashed the FIRs over the student protests and barred any future coercive action against any student over the CJP protests.
The matter was brought to the attention of a bench led by the Chief Justice of India through the oral mentioning of Senior Advocate Bishwajit Bhattacharyya. He submitted that the Executive Magistrate issued notice to a second-year student of the Gautam Buddha University, asking him to show cause for not furnishing a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh to ensure that he will preserve peace. As per press reports, the notice was later withdrawn, the lawyer submitted.
"Notice was issued to a 2nd year student by Ex. Magistrate of Greater Noida on input of Noida police...it was about to be executed...later on it came in the press that it has been withdrawn. This is an experiment with students of India. This is prima facie contempt. Authorities of Noida and UP can't create fear psychosis among students," the lawyer submitted.
Taking exception to the Magistrate's action, the CJI said, "How could a Magistrate dare to issue notice? We made clear no coercive action against any student! No Magistrate could violate that order."
Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked if the notice has been withdrawn, what cause of action survived. The lawyer replied that contempt, once committed, cannot be purged by simply withdrawing the notice. "It is contempt of the majesty of this Court. This is the highest court of the country, which is holding the court of our democracy," he submitted.
The CJI asked the lawyer to bring on record the notice through a petition, and said that the Court will seek an explanation from the authority.
The notice was issued by the Court of the Executive Magistrate III, Greater Noida, against Akshat Tripathi, under Section 126/135of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), after a police report alleged that he was instigating other students to participate in a proposed protest.
According to the notice dated September 4, 2026, the police alleged that Tripathi was “spreading and instigating anti-government misleading talks” among university students and encouraging them to join a proposed dharna by the CJP.
The police report further claimed that Tripathi's alleged activities had created considerable tension and that there was a possibility of fighting, quarrelling and a consequent breach of peace and public order.
The Executive Magistrate said he was satisfied with the contents of the police report and found sufficient grounds to initiate proceedings under Sections 126 and 135 of the BNSS, citing a strong possibility of a breach of peace.
The order, issued under Section 130 of the BNSS, directed Tripathi to show cause as to why he should not be required to execute a personal bond of ₹5 lakh along with two sureties of ₹5 lakh each.
The student, Akshat Tripathi, has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court through AoR Subhash Chandran KR challenging the notice.
For More News Updates Follow Us On www.tconews.in
