Allahabad HC pulls up Noida DM for applying NSA against law student

Noida district magistrate Medha Roopam apparently sought to make an example of 25-year-old law student Akriti Chaudhary for showing solidarity with workers protesting for better wages and humane working conditions. Eleven FIRs were lodged against Chaudhary, an artist who also teaches children in slums in her spare time, and she was detained under the National Security Act (NSA) on the DM’s orders. Finding the detention devoid of merit or material, a bench of justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev pulled up the Noida DM for passing the order without application of mind.

The court awarded Rs 5 lakh in compensation to the law student and directed that the amount be recovered from the salaries of the Gautam Buddha Nagar DM and other officials, “right down to the SHO”. The Noida DM is the daughter of chief election commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. While the court quashed Akriti Chaudhary’s detention on Wednesday, 2 September, the order was made available on Monday, 7 September 2026. “The conduct of the district magistrate Gautam Buddha Nagar who passed the impugned order, is worthy of derision,” the court said in its scathing order.

The court observed that while violence and destruction of property did take place in Noida on 13 April, the law student was arrested on 11 September, although the police claimed to have arrested her on 12 September. The police claimed that she was asked to sign a Rs 50,000 Bond of Good Behaviour but refused. The court pointed out that the notice for the bond was a sham and had been prepared after her arrest, as evidenced by the general diary (GD) number recorded on the notice. Had the notice been served before her arrest, the GD number recorded at the time of her arrest would not have appeared on it, the court observed.

Questioning the prosecution’s case, the court observed that while the police cited the student’s WhatsApp chats to claim that she was calling on friends to mobilise people in support of the agitation, neither the chats nor the videos relied upon by the police provided any evidence of incitement to violence.

“Messages on 11th April, 2026, from 17:56 hrs onwards, sent to the petitioner, Akriti Chaudhary, by her associate Priyambada have not been answered by the petitioner. The only probable reason was that the mobile was not with the petitioner or that she was in a situation that she could not reply to the messages from Priyambada, which probabilise as true the version put forth by the petitioner that she was in the custody of the State from 5.30 pm of 11.04.2026 while her formal arrest was shown from 12.04.2026 and concomitantly, falsifies the contention of the State that the petitioner was in the custody of the State only from 12.04.2026,” the order records.

“This Court repeatedly asked the learned counsel for the State to point out from the WhatsApp chats and the video recordings as to which one of them incited people or disclosed a conspiracy inciting people to indulge in acts of rioting, arson and destruction of public and private property. The learned counsel for the State has not been able to show a single message from the WhatsApp chats between the Petitioner and her associates or any video clip which would reveal any incitement from the petitioner, either evidently or by necessary implication, which would disclose that it was the involvement of the petitioner and the conspiracy hatched by her that resulted in the violence which erupted from 13.04.2026, much after the petitioner was taken into custody by the State on 11.04.2026 (as held by this Court),” the order goes on to add.

A substantial part of the order reminds IAS and IPS officers serving in Uttar Pradesh of their responsibilities. “…When they act in a manner which is harmonious with their oath of allegiance, the thankful citizens of this State shall elevate them, and very rightly so, to a position which would be envied by the Gods themselves. However, every time they ignore that solemn oath and act contrary to it, the people of the State of Uttar Pradesh would view them as an oppressive vestige of the British Empire arousing angst and hatred towards them, creating an environment of civil unrest…,” the order states.

In a case where the police report against the petitioner contained only allegations without any credible material against her, the district magistrate was expected to be vigilant and examine the record threadbare to determine whether there was any material in support of the allegations and, even thereafter, assess whether the oppressive provisions of the NSA were warranted against the petitioner. The District Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar, is guilty of violating her oath of allegiance, making this a fit case for the imposition of compensation on the petitioner, the court observed.

Chaudhary graduated from Daulat Ram College, went on to secure a master’s degree from Delhi University and is currently a student at its Faculty of Law. She has secured bail in six of the 11 cases. Despite the court quashing her detention under the NSA, she continues to remain in prison until she secures bail in the remaining cases.