Neha Bora moves Delhi HC against police notice to execute ‘peace’ bond

• Neha Bora seeks to quash a police notice requiring her to execute a Rs 10,000 peace bond.

• The AISA president alleges the notice lacks evidence of any likelihood of a breach of peace.

• Her plea calls the proceedings an attempt to suppress peaceful dissent and seeks protection from coercive action.

All India Students' Association (AISA) president Neha Bora on Monday approached the Delhi High Court challenging a Delhi Police notice directing her to execute a bond for “keeping peace” before a Special Executive Magistrate (SEM).

Bora, who has been at the forefront of recent protests against alleged irregularities in the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, has sought the quashing of the notice and directions restraining the police from taking coercive action against her.

She is likely to seek an urgent hearing, although the High Court is closed this week for the Dussehra vacation.

The notice, issued on 17 October under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), directed Bora to appear before the SEM on 19 October and explain why she should not execute a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with one surety to maintain peace during the period of enquiry.

Section 126 empowers a magistrate to require a person to execute a bond to maintain peace when there is credible information that the person is likely to breach the peace, disturb public tranquillity or commit an act that could cause such a disturbance.

Bora was taken into preventive detention on 16 October while on her way to participate in the Cockroach Janata Party's ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march. She was released the following day.

In her petition, settled by lawyer Abhik Chimni, Bora has argued that the notice is vague, factually incorrect and unsupported by material establishing a likelihood of a breach of peace.

The plea contends that the notice does not specify any “period, occasion or event” in connection with which a breach of peace is apprehended. It describes the proceedings as a “colourable exercise of preventive powers to suppress peaceful dissent” and alleges violations of Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b) and 21 of the Constitution, which protect freedom of speech and expression, the right to assemble peacefully, and the right to life and personal liberty.

The petition said the proceedings before the SEM stemmed from alleged sloganeering at Mandi House on 16 October, repeated protests near Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, and the alleged instigation of people to participate in a demonstration at Connaught Place on the same day.

“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 petition said.

It added that Bora had called for a peaceful gathering at Mandi House at 5 pm that day and was detained from that location.

The plea also argued that the notice did not identify any specific prohibitory order or incident allegedly violated. It said the only order on record, dated 23 August 2026, did not extend to Mandi House and exempted Jantar Mantar Road.