![The CJI had orally observed that the Magistrate had no authority to issue such a notice “when we have already annulled [FIRs] and directed that no penal action would be taken against any student”.](https://www.thehindu.com/theme/images/th-online/1x1_spacer.png "The CJI had orally observed that the Magistrate had no authority to issue such a notice “when we have already annulled [FIRs] and directed that no penal action would be taken against any student”.")
The Magistrate issued the notice on September 4 despite an explicit Supreme Court order three days earlier, on September 1, prohibiting coercive measures against students who participated in the agitation.
On September 9, the apex court made its displeasure clear about the Magistrate’s issuance of the notice to Akshat Tripathi under Section 130 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in connection with preventive proceedings.
Mr. Tripathi had been called upon to show cause as to why he should not be bound to execute a personal bond of ₹5 lakh with two sureties for allegedly “instigating” fellow students to join a proposed dharna of the Cockroach Janta Party.
The CJI had orally observed that the Magistrate had no authority to issue such a notice “when we have already annulled [FIRs] and directed that no penal action would be taken against any student”.
“It was a clear-cut order. The language was very plain. Any layperson could understand the order,” Chief Justice Kant had observed.
The September 1 order had quashed FIRs registered against protestors, who were overwhelmingly students, involved in the agitation against the NEET-UG question paper leaks.
The apex court had also barred fresh FIRs against students in connection with the Cockroach Janta Party protests.
