The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed strong displeasure over a notice issued by an Executive Magistrate in Greater Noida to a university student for allegedly participating in the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant questioned how the magistrate could issue such a notice when the Supreme Court had already passed a clear order protecting students from coercive action in connection with the protests.
Notice Issued To Gautam Buddha University Student
The matter concerns Akshat Tripathi, a 20-year-old second-year law student at Gautam Buddha University. An Executive Magistrate issued him a notice on September 4, alleging that he was spreading “anti-government propaganda” and encouraging fellow students to participate in the CJP-led protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar.
The notice reportedly sought a ₹5 lakh personal bond from the student to maintain peace. The notice was withdrawn the following day, but the incident was brought before the Supreme Court by senior advocate Bishwajit Bhattacharyya.
“How Dare A Magistrate Do That?”
During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant questioned the authority of the Executive Magistrate to issue the notice despite the Supreme Court’s earlier directions.
“How could a magistrate issue the notice? Our order was clear that no coercive action can be taken against any student across the country. How dare a magistrate do that?” the court said.
The Chief Justice said the court was surprised that an executive magistrate or district magistrate could take such action when the September 1 order had clearly prohibited action against students who participated in the protests.
What Did The Supreme Court Order Earlier?
On September 1, the Supreme Court had invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and ordered that criminal cases arising from the CJP protests between July 20 and 25 would not be pursued or investigated.
The court also directed that no fresh action should be taken against students in connection with those protests and made it clear that mere participation in the demonstrations could not be treated as an offence under penal laws.
Court Seeks Explanation
Although the notice to Tripathi was subsequently withdrawn, the Supreme Court indicated that the matter could not simply be ignored.
CJI Surya Kant said the court would seek an explanation from the Gautam Budh Nagar district administration and the executive magistrates involved in issuing the notice.
The Supreme Court’s intervention has once again highlighted the importance of executive authorities complying with clear and binding judicial directions, particularly when fundamental rights and student participation in protests are involved.
