AISA president Neha Bora has challenged a Delhi Police peace bond notice in the Delhi High Court. Her plea alleges preventive powers were misused to suppress peaceful dissent.
Stock photo used for illustration
Newdelhi,Oct 19, 2026 16:20 IST
All India Students' Association (AISA) president Neha Bora approached the Delhi High Court on Monday against a Delhi Police notice asking her to execute a bond before a Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) to maintain peace, news agency Press Trust of India reported.
Bora, who has been leading recent protests against alleged irregularities in the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, has sought the quashing of the notice and directions to the police not to take coercive action against her. She is likely to seek an urgent hearing as the High Court is closed this week for the Dussehra vacation.
According to PTI, the notice was issued on October 17 under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). It directed Bora to appear before the SEM on October 19 and explain 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 allows an SEM to require a person to execute a bond to maintain peace if there is credible information that the person is likely to breach the peace, disturb public order or commit an act that may cause such a disturbance.
Bora was taken into preventive detention on October 16 while she was on her way to participate in the Cockroach Janata Party's “Lehra Do Tiranga” march. She was released on October 17.
In her petition, settled by lawyer Abhik Chimni, Bora said the police notice was vague and factually incorrect and contained no material or information to support the claimed likelihood of a breach of peace.
The plea said the notice did not disclose any “period, occasion or event in relation to which breach is apprehended”. It described the proceedings as 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 petition said the proceedings before the SEM were based on alleged sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16, repeated protests around Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, and the alleged instigation of people to participate in a protest at Connaught Place on 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 on 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 on 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.
Bora has challenged the basis of the police notice and asked the Delhi High Court to set it aside, while also seeking protection from coercive action over the proceedings before the SEM.
- Ends