Supreme Court Rebukes Greater Noida Magistrate Over Student Notice Despite CJP Protest Order

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday strongly questioned the action of a Greater Noida Executive Magistrate who issued a notice to a student in connection with protests linked to the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP), despite an earlier Supreme Court order barring coercive action against students over the protests.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant expressed serious concern over the notice and questioned how a magistrate could initiate such proceedings after the apex court had already issued clear directions protecting students involved in the protests.

What Triggered the Supreme Court's Anger?

The matter concerns Akshat Tripathi, a second-year student of Gautam Buddha University in Greater Noida. An Executive Magistrate issued a notice dated September 4 under provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

The notice, based on a police report, alleged that Tripathi was encouraging other students to participate in a proposed CJP protest and was spreading what police described as anti-government and misleading statements.

Authorities asked him to show cause why he should not be required to furnish a ₹5 lakh personal bond along with two sureties of ₹5 lakh each to maintain peace.

Supreme Court: “How Could a Magistrate Dare?”

During Wednesday's proceedings, the issue was brought before a bench headed by CJI Surya Kant.

The Supreme Court questioned how the Executive Magistrate could issue such a notice when the Court had already directed that no coercive action should be taken against students in connection with the CJP protests.

The Court indicated that it would seek an explanation from the concerned authorities.

Notice Was Later Withdrawn

According to reports placed before the Supreme Court, the notice was subsequently withdrawn.

Police officials said the notice had been revoked after the matter came to their attention. However, the withdrawal did not prevent the Supreme Court from examining whether the original action was contrary to its earlier directions.

Senior advocate Bishwajit Bhattacharyya argued before the Court that simply withdrawing the notice could not erase the seriousness of the alleged violation of the Supreme Court's order.

Student Denies Police Allegations

Tripathi has denied the allegations against him and said he participated in the protest peacefully. He also claimed that he was not attending university classes at the time because the institution had remained closed for several weeks.

The Students' Federation of India (SFI) also criticised the action, describing it as repressive.

Why the Case Matters

The controversy has raised broader questions about the limits of administrative powers when courts have already issued specific protections for protesting students.

The Supreme Court's latest intervention also underlines the importance of authorities following binding judicial directions, particularly when those directions specifically prohibit coercive action.

The Court is now expected to examine the circumstances in which the Greater Noida notice was issued and seek an explanation from the concerned officials.