‘Conduct worthy of derision’: Allahabad HC pulls up District Magistrate over NSA detention of law student

The Allahabad Excessive Court docket has come down closely on Gautam Buddha Nagar District Justice of the Peace Medha Roopam, who had issued the order to detain a 25-year-old Delhi College regulation scholar beneath the Nationwide Safety Act (NSA) over a staff’ protest in Noida in April this yr. In an in depth order launched on Monday (September 7, 2026), the court docket noticed that Ms. Roopam “desired to make an instance” out of the petitioner.

A Bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev had on September 2 quashed the NSA detention of Akriti Chaudhary, who had spent practically 5 months in custody.

The Bench had allowed Ms. Chaudhary’s habeas corpus petition and ordered her quick launch, until she was required in one other case. The court docket flagged discrepancies within the arrest discover and termed the State’s model a “concocted story”.

Ms. Chaudhary was amongst a number of activists arrested in reference to the protest held between April 10 and 18, throughout which industrial and contractual staff demanded a hike in wage and parity with wages paid in neighbouring Haryana. The protest had turned violent on April 13 and roads had been blocked.

The Uttar Pradesh police invoked the NSA towards Ms. Chaudhary a month later, alleging that she had instigated protesters to bask in stone-pelting and arson. Throughout a press convention, the police claimed to have “sturdy digital and videographic proof” towards her.

In her petition, Ms. Chaudhary argued that she was already in custody earlier than the violence broke out on April 13. She contended that there was no factual foundation for her detention and that the method resulting in her preventive detention was procedurally flawed.

‘Responsible of violating oath’

Pulling up the District Justice of the Peace, the Bench famous, “On this case, the conduct of the District Justice of the Peace, Gautam Buddha Nagar, who handed the impugned order, is worthy of derision”

“In a case the place the police report towards the petitioner had solely allegations with none credible materials towards her, the District Justice of the Peace was anticipated to be vigilant and look at the file threadbare to find out if there was any materials in assist of the allegations and, even thereafter, assess whether or not the oppressive provisions of the NSA had been warranted towards the petitioner and the way the overall regulation of the land was insufficient towards a feminine scholar activist with none earlier prison file,” order learn.

The court docket noticed that the District Justice of the Peace “desired to set an instance” out of the petitioner and deter others from exercising their proper to freedom of speech and expression in public areas in assist of staff.

It added that Ms. Roopam is “responsible of violating her oath of allegiance, making this a match case for the imposition of compensation to the petitioner”.

The court docket directed that Ms. Chaudhary be paid compensation of ₹5 lakh and that the quantity be recovered from the wage of the District Justice of the Peace, who handed the order of detention “with out utility of thoughts”, and “all such different officers who could have been accountable, proper right down to the Station Home Officer” of the police station, who had ready the preliminary report warranting the detention of the petitioner beneath the provisions of the NSA.

‘No show-cause discover’

The State had submitted within the court docket that Ms. Chaudhary was arrested at 10.56 a.m. on April 12 and was issued a warning discover beneath Part 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Justice Sreedharan questioned why no show-cause discover was issued earlier than the warning.

The State accepted that no discover was served beneath Part 126. The court docket then referred to as for the police’s normal diary, which confirmed that Ms. Chaudhary was arrested earlier than the discover was ready. The court docket requested whether or not she had been produced earlier than a Justice of the Peace earlier than the arrest and requested for proof of incitement.

The State instructed the court docket that protesters gathered on the web site on April 11, however the court docket identified that, in accordance with police data, no violence occurred that day. The State additionally did not submit the video footage exhibiting Ms. Chaudhary frightening protesters to throw stones or set automobiles on fireplace.