Delhi HC rejects Neha Bora's plea, directs her to sign peace bond, 'maintain peace'

The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by All India Students’ Association (AISA) president Neha Bora challenging a Delhi Police notice asking her to furnish a personal bond of ₹10,000 and one surety to maintain peace during an inquiry. The notice was issued after her participation in the “Lehra Do Tiranga” march on October 16.Delhi high court dismisses AISA president Neha Bora’s plea against police notice over ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march. (AFP)Pronouncing the order, Justice Subramonium Prasad said, "I am rejecting the writ petition at this juncture."The court, however, issued certain directions to the special executive magistrate (SEM) to ensure that Bora is provided with all the material relevant to the proceedings, news agency PTI reported.

Why Neha Bora challenged the police noticeThe notice was issued by Delhi Police on October 17 under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). It directed Bora to appear before the SEM on October 19 and explain why she should not be asked to furnish a personal bond of ₹10,000 along with one surety to maintain peace during the inquiry.Section 126 of the BNSS empowers an SEM to require a person to execute such a bond when credible information suggests that the person may breach the peace, disturb public tranquillity or commit an act that could cause a disturbance.In her petition, drafted by lawyer Abhik Chimni, Bora argued that the notice was vague and factually incorrect.

She also contended that it did not provide any material or information to support the allegation that she was likely to breach the peace.Bora was detained ahead of ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ marchBora was taken into preventive detention on October 16 while on her way to join the Cockroach Janta Party’s ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ march at Connaught Place in Delhi. She was released on October 17.The proceedings before the SEM concern allegations of sloganeering at Mandi House on October 16, repeated protests near Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, and allegedly instigating people to participate in the demonstration held that day.What Bora’s counsel argued in courtDuring the hearing on Thursday, Bora’s senior counsel argued that citizens did not require permission to hoist the national flag.

The counsel also submitted that seeking regime change was not wrong in a democracy.