Delhi High Court Upholds Peace Bond Notice for Neha Bora
The Delhi High Court confirms the issuance of a peace bond notice to Neha Bora, citing case diary entries and prohibitory orders.
The court ruled that the peace bond notice was based on documented evidence, not hearsay.
Neha Bora's protests were deemed to breach prohibitory orders in effect.
The court emphasized the SEM's discretion in assessing the risk of peace disturbances.
The Delhi High Court has upheld a peace bond notice issued to Neha Bora, requiring her to execute a personal bond of ₹10,000 to maintain peace during an ongoing inquiry. This decision follows her detention last week and is supported by entries from police case diaries that document various incidents related to her protests.
Justice Subramonium Prasad noted that the notice was not solely based on hearsay but was substantiated by a prohibitory order issued on August 24, 2026, by the Assistant Commissioner of Police. This order covers the jurisdiction of Barakhamba Road and Tilak Marg, including the Mandi House area where Bora was protesting. The court rejected Bora's claims that her location was exempt from the prohibitory order, affirming that the nature of her actions warranted the SEM's intervention.
The court highlighted that the SEM's decision to initiate proceedings under Chapter IX of the BNSS is based on the nature of the act rather than the frequency of incidents. It stated that even a single incident could justify the issuance of a peace bond if it indicates a potential for further disturbances. The court found sufficient evidence of Bora's previous breaches of the prohibitory order, which justified the SEM's actions.
In its ruling, the High Court clarified that the SEM is not required to conduct a detailed investigation akin to a fact-finding mission when assessing the risk of peace breaches. Instead, the SEM must rely on the information presented to him, which includes diary entries and witness testimonies that meet the statutory requirements.
Looking ahead, the court noted that Bora retains the right to challenge the peace bond notice at later stages of the inquiry. It emphasized that the SEM should consider the principles established by the Supreme Court regarding the issuance of such bonds and ensure that due process is followed throughout the proceedings. The court's observations are limited to the current stage of the notice issuance, allowing for further legal recourse as the inquiry progresses.
