The Supreme Court strongly reprimanded the Noida administration for issuing notice to the 20-year-old law student. The student took part in the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) movement organized at Jantar Mantar in Delhi and appealed to his colleagues to join the protest. Later the Gautam Buddha Nagar district administration issued a notice to the student. Chief Justice Justice Surya Kant issued a strong rebuke and said how can a magistrate dare to issue a notice?
The executive magistrate issued a notice to Gautam Buddha University student Akshat Tripathi on September 4. In this, this notice was issued under Section 130 of the Indian Civil Security Code (BNSS). In this, he was asked to pay a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh. However, it was withdrawn a day later. On the other hand, student Akshat said that he had participated in the protest peacefully. Senior advocate Biswajit Bhattacharya took up the matter before the apex court. Now the court will seek clarification from the Executive Magistrate of Gautam Buddha Nagar.
Also read: The era of paper RC for vehicles is over, now smart cards will be available, big change in UP
Notice against the order of September 1
Before a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, senior advocate Vishwajit Bhattacharya said that 'experiments' were being conducted on Indian students. This notice is also against the September 1 order of the Supreme Court. He argued that prima facie the officers are guilty of contempt of court. He cannot be exempted from the responsibility of contempt because of withdrawal of notice.
Also read: This species of animals is not found in India, where did these 5 orangutans come from in Odisha?
We will seek clarification: Supreme Court
The Chief Justice agreed to the arguments of senior advocate Vishwajit Bhattacharya. He said, 'You are absolutely right. There is no question of taking action against our youth. We have passed a clear order. We wonder how the magistrate can issue notice when we have already ordered no punitive action against any student. This was a very clear order.' He further said, 'We will seek clarification. He should explain why this was done.