A sub-inspector in Uttar Pradesh has been suspended for serving a notice on a student who participated in a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, despite a Supreme Court order barring penal action against students involved in the demonstrations, the UP DGP Headquarters said on Thursday, September 10.
The suspended officer was identified as Shiva Pandey. The notice was issued to Akshat Tripathi, a student and leader of the Students’ Federation of India, over his participation in the July 20 Cockroach Janta Party protest at Jantar Mantar. The notice required Tripathi to furnish a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh with two sureties of the same amount.
The UP DGP office later clarified to The Indian Express that the assistant commissioner of police who was functioning as an executive magistrate and issued the notice had not been suspended. The clarification followed confusion during proceedings in the Supreme Court over the identity of the official who had served the notice.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta initially told a three-judge bench that the official was not the district magistrate and that “some other official” had been suspended. Senior Advocate P V Dinesh, representing Tripathi, had earlier referred to the official as the district magistrate before correcting the description to executive magistrate. The bench was headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana.
The Supreme Court had on September 1 ordered that no penal action be taken on cases registered against students who participated in the Cockroach Janta Party-led protests over examination paper leaks. The court had allowed an exception for 2,873 individuals with antecedents involving grave and heinous offences, against whom police could file first information reports.
The executive magistrate’s notice was issued three days after that order. It called on Tripathi to explain why he should not be bound down under Sections 126 and 135 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita by executing the personal bond and providing sureties. The notice alleged that he had instigated fellow students to join a proposed dharna and referred to the alleged spreading of anti-government and misleading talks.
Tripathi challenged the notice before the Supreme Court, arguing that it did not identify a specific overt act, date, time, statement or instance of imminent violence. He also said the notice was directed at him for encouraging peaceful assembly and protected speech, and that it required him to appear on September 5 with barely a day to arrange legal representation and sureties.
The notice was subsequently withdrawn. During the hearing on Wednesday, the Chief Justice questioned how an executive or district magistrate could issue such a notice after the court had annulled the cases and directed that no action be taken. “No penal action against any student: It was a very clear-cut order,” the Chief Justice said, according to the report.
On Thursday, Dinesh urged the court to intervene and said there should be a message to officials. Mehta informed the bench about the suspension but said, “Let’s not sensationalise it.” The UP DGP Headquarters’ clarification established that the suspended officer was the sub-inspector who served the notice, while the executive magistrate who issued it had not been suspended.
