New Delhi: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the Greater Noida Executive Magistrate who issued a show-cause notice to a Gautam Buddh University student, seeking a personal bond of Rs …

New Delhi: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the Greater Noida Executive Magistrate who issued a show-cause notice to a Gautam Buddh University student, seeking a personal bond of Rs five lakh for allegedly campaigning for a Cockroach Janata Party protest, has been suspended. His statement came in response to a writ petition filed by the student, Akshat Tripathi, challenging the notice issued under provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Senior advocate P V Dinesh mentioned the petition before a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana during proceedings connected to the July CJP protests.  He asked the court to take up the matter, saying a strong message must go to officers. The notice had alleged that Tripathi was indulging in “anti-government misleading talks” among students and required him to furnish a Rs five-lakh personal bond with two sureties of the same amount for six months.‘Nobody can browbeat victim’: Supreme Court seeks report on alleged harassment of minor CJP protesterThe CJI pointed out that when the issue was mentioned the previous day, he had taken a strong view and sought the State’s response.  The Solicitor General then informed the bench that the officer had been suspended. Tripathi’s petition, filed through advocate-on-record Subhash Chandran KR, argued that the proceedings violated the Supreme Court’s September 1 order that quashed FIRs related to the student protests and barred coercive actions against students.  Encouraging fellow students to join a proposed dharna, the plea contended, was protected under the rights to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a)) and peaceful assembly (Article 19(1)(b)), it claimed. Requiring a Rs five-lakh bond with matching sureties, it further contended, amounted to a serious deprivation of personal liberty under Article 21, while the single day’s notice violated principles of natural justice. The plea stated the notice invoked Sections 126 and 135 of the BNSS, which allowed an Executive Magistrate to seek security for keeping the peace and conduct an inquiry. It was based on a Sub-Inspector’s report from Eco First police station claiming Tripathi was spreading and instigating anti-government talks to encourage students to join a proposed CJP dharna, allegedly creating tension that could lead to fights or a breach of public order. The petition contended that the notice disclosed no specific date, time, statement, overt act or instance of actual or imminent violence attributable to Tripathi, and that no supporting material was supplied to him. It also challenged the procedure, including the notice of September 4, which fixed September 5 as the appearance date, giving him barely one day to engage counsel, understand the allegations and arrange the sureties.

Source: Deccan Herald