Supreme Court Slams Magistrate For Targeting Student Despite Order Not To Act Against NEET Protesters

The top court pointed out the  September 1 order quashed all FIRs registered against students protesters across the country over the exam paper leak issue.

Supreme Court NEET protesters Edited by
Supreme Court Slams Magistrate For Targeting Student Despite Order Not To Act Against NEET Protesters

Supreme Court Slams Magistrate For Targeting Student Despite Order Not To Act Against NEET Protesters

New Delhi: Supreme Court Chief Justice Surya Kant on Wednesday, September 9, sharply questioned how the Noida executive magistrate could issue a notice under Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, demanding a Rs 5 lakh bond from the student over alleged Jantar Mantar protests over NEET issues.

The top court pointed out the  September 1 order quashed FIRs registered against students protesters across the country over the exam paper leak issue. The court had stated clearly barred coercive steps against students without serious criminal records.

Read Also: Supreme Court Quashes All Cases Registered Against NEET Paper Leak Protesters Across India

While hearing the appeal, the chief justice asked, “How could a Magistrate dare to issue notice?” adding that the top court has made clear no coercive action against any student and no Magistrate could violate that order.

The chief justice asked that the the Supreme Court will ask Magistrate to explain Counsel mentioned before the chief justice. The counsel for the student who was served the notice pointed out it was clearly in contravention of your Sept 1 order, which showed grace towards students. “This is an experiment with students of India. This is prima facie contempt. Authorities of Noida and UP can’t create fear psychosis among students,” the counsel stated.

Read Also: Bihar Police Allegedly Book Mohammad Sadaqat, Living In Russia For 4 Months, Over NEET Paper Leak Protest

The notice was later withdrawn after an inquiry deemed the information false, but the bench directed it be placed on record and ordered an explanation from the magistrate to enforce compliance.