'How Dare Magistrate Issue Notice?': Supreme Court Slams Greater Noida Authority Over Student Notice, Threatens Action

The Supreme Court of India strongly reprimanded local executive authorities on Wednesday after an Executive Magistrate in Greater Noida issued a preventive notice to a university student over a proposed political protest, directly violating binding apex court directives.

A bench led by the Chief Justice of India expressed severe displeasure after learning that police and administrative officials in Uttar Pradesh issued a show-cause notice to Akshat Tripathi, a second-year undergraduate student at Gautam Buddha University. The magistrate had asked Tripathi to furnish a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh alongside two sureties of equal value to maintain public peace.

CJI Warns of Contempt Action Against Officials

Taking strong exception to the administrative measure, the Chief Justice questioned how local officials could ignore explicit judicial orders prohibiting intimidation tactics against students.

"How could a Magistrate dare to issue notice? We made clear no coercive action against any student! No Magistrate could violate that order," the Chief Justice remarked in open court.

The top court's stern observations came after a lawyer brought the matter to the bench's attention through an oral mentioning. The advocate pointed out that the Supreme Court had previously quashed FIRs related to student demonstrations organised around the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protests and explicitly barred law enforcement from taking coercive steps against university students across the country.

Counsel argued that despite media reports suggesting the administration subsequently pulled back the notice, the initial issuance exposed an attempt to intimidate campus activists. "This is an experiment with students of India. This is prima facie contempt. Authorities of Noida and UP cannot create fear psychosis among students," the lawyer told the court.

Police Alleged 'Anti-Government' Instigation

The dispute stems from an official communication generated by the Court of Executive Magistrate III in Greater Noida under Sections 126 and 135 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The executive order relied entirely on an adverse police report submitted by local precinct officers.

According to the September 4 police report, law enforcement claimed that Tripathi was actively "spreading and instigating anti-government misleading talks" across the Gautam Buddha University campus. Officials alleged that his campaign encouraging fellow students to join a planned dharna organised by the CJP posed a direct threat to public tranquility.

Asserting that Tripathi's interactions created local tension that could degenerate into physical altercations, the executive magistrate concluded there were sufficient grounds under Section 130 of the BNSS to demand financial undertakings to guarantee good behaviour.

Supreme Court Directs Legal Filing

Despite reports indicating that local administrative officers initiated steps to withdraw the preventive summons following public scrutiny, the Supreme Court refused to let the procedural breach pass without accountability.

The apex court bench instructed the mentioning counsel to place the magistrate’s notice formally on record by filing a detailed writ petition. The bench indicated it will issue an official summons seeking a comprehensive explanation from the executive magistrate and Uttar Pradesh state authorities regarding why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for violating prior court mandates.