Delhi High Court to Decide on AISA President's Plea Against Police Notice

The Delhi High Court is poised to deliver a ruling on October 23 regarding Neha Bora, the president of the All India Students' Association (AISA), who is contesting a police notice that mandates her to sign a peace bond. Bora, a prominent figure in protests against alleged irregularities in the Election Commission's electoral roll revision, argues that the notice is vague and lacks substantiation. The court proceedings have raised significant questions about citizens' rights to protest and the legality of the police's actions. As the case unfolds, it highlights the ongoing tensions surrounding political dissent in the country.

By Narendra Chaudhary Oct 22, 2026, 18:49 IST

Court Hearing on Neha Bora's Challenge

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court announced it will issue a ruling on October 23 regarding the plea filed by Neha Bora, president of the All India Students' Association (AISA), contesting a police notice that requires her to sign a 'peace' bond before a special executive magistrate.

Justice Subramonium Prasad, after a nearly three-hour hearing involving arguments from both Bora's legal counsel and the police, has reserved the decision on the matter.

The judge stated, "I will pass order tomorrow at 6 PM."

Bora, who has been actively protesting against alleged discrepancies in the Election Commission's special intensive revision of electoral rolls, is seeking to have the police notice annulled and is requesting that no coercive measures be taken against her.

During the proceedings, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Bora, argued that the special executive magistrate failed to properly consider the case when issuing the notice, describing it as a mere 'cut and paste' job.

Referring to the police notice that claimed Bora raised the national flag without permission, the counsel asserted that citizens do not require authorization to display the national flag.

Sankaranarayanan remarked, "The question is whether this notice holds any validity. We do not need permission to hoist the national flag. They should take a class on law."

In response, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, representing the Delhi Police, challenged the validity of Bora's petition, arguing that sufficient evidence was available to the special executive magistrate at the time the notice was issued.

The notice, dated October 17 and issued under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), instructed Bora to appear before the magistrate on October 19 to explain why she should not be required to sign a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with one surety to maintain peace during the inquiry.

Section 126 grants the magistrate the authority to enforce such bond signing if credible information suggests a person may disrupt public order or engage in wrongful acts.

Bora was placed in preventive detention on October 16 while en route to join the Cockroach Janta Party's 'Lehra Do Tiranga' march and was released the following day.

In her petition, prepared by lawyer Abhik Chimni, Bora contends that the police notice is vague, factually incorrect, and lacks the necessary information to justify the alleged likelihood of a breach of peace.

The petition argues that the notice fails to specify a 'period, occasion, or event' related to the anticipated breach and claims that the proceedings represent an improper use of preventive powers aimed at suppressing peaceful dissent, violating Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), and 21 of the Constitution.

The proceedings before the magistrate are based on accusations of sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16, ongoing protests near Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, and inciting individuals to participate in a protest in Connaught Place on the same day.

The petition asserts that the notice is based on an incorrect premise, stating that Bora instigated participation in a demonstration at Central Park, Connaught Place on October 16, 2026. It clarifies that her call was for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5:00 PM on the same date, and she was detained from that location.

Furthermore, the notice's reference to 'prohibitory orders 163 BNSS' does not identify any specific order or incident. In fact, the only order on record dated August 23, 2026, does not apply to Mandi House and exempts Jantar Mantar Road.