The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned how a Greater Noida Executive Magistrate could issue a notice to a student in connection with the student protests by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), despite an earlier court order quashing FIRs related to the protests and restraining authorities from taking coercive action against students, according to a LiveLaw report.
The issue was brought before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India through oral mentioning by Senior Advocate Bishwajit Bhattacharyya, LiveLaw reported.
According to the report, Bhattacharyya told the court that the Executive Magistrate had issued a notice to a second-year student of Gautam Buddha University, Akshat Tripathi, directing him to show cause why he should not be required to furnish a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh to ensure the preservation of peace.
The lawyer said the notice had subsequently been withdrawn, according to LiveLaw.
Questioning the action, the CJI said, “How could a Magistrate dare to issue notice?” and noted that the Supreme Court had made it clear that no coercive action could be taken against students in connection with the CJP protests, the report added.
Bhattacharyya told the court that the notice had been issued based on a report from the Noida Police and argued that such action could create a “fear psychosis” among students. He also described the action as potentially amounting to contempt, according to the report.
The CJI asked the lawyer to place the notice on record through a petition and indicated that the court would seek an explanation from the concerned authority, LiveLaw reported.
According to the notice dated September 4, 2026, cited in the report, the Executive Magistrate III, Greater Noida, initiated proceedings against Tripathi under Sections 126 and 135 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), based on a police report alleging that he was encouraging students to participate in a proposed CJP protest.
The police report, as cited in the notice, alleged that Tripathi was “spreading and instigating anti-government misleading talks” among university students and encouraging them to join a proposed dharna by the CJP.
It further claimed that his alleged activities had created tension and could lead to fighting, quarrelling and a breach of peace and public order, according to LiveLaw.
The Executive Magistrate said the police report provided sufficient grounds to initiate proceedings and directed Tripathi to show cause why he should not be required to execute a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh along with two sureties of Rs 5 lakh each, LiveLaw reported.
