Can a bond be demanded while an inquiry is still on? AISA national president Neha Bora has asked the Delhi High Court to stay a Delhi Police notice for a Rs 10,000 bond with one surety, and wants it heard in vacation time.
New Delhi: Challenging a notice of October 18 from the Delhi Police, Neha Bora has moved the Delhi High Court and asked for an urgent hearing [Neha Bora v. Delhi Police]. The notice directed her to appear before the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM), New Delhi District, on October 19 and execute a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with a surety to “maintain peace during the period of inquiry”. She seeks an immediate stay and the withdrawal of the notice.
When this article was written, no bench, petition number or listing date had been reported. The High Court is closed for the Dussehra vacation and reopens on October 26, and her legal team has said it will press for a hearing during the break. AISA says the team is led by Abhik Chimni, with Pranjal Abrol and Moksha among others.
The notice and her objection
As the notice has been described publicly, it rests on Sections 126 and 130, read with Section 135(3), of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and seeks a personal bond and one surety for as long as the inquiry lasts. Her lawyers have said they will tell the SEM that she will not sign the bond, and will let the magistrate know of the High Court challenge.
An AISA statement says the petition calls the notice “prima facie ambiguous, factually incorrect” and argues that it infringes Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Those are the petitioner’s contentions. No response from the Delhi Police has been reported, and the material available does not explain why the inquiry was begun.
The detention that came before
Bora was detained from the protest march at Mandi House on Friday, October 16, ahead of the “Lehra Do Tiranga” march at Central Park, Connaught Place. According to the Delhi Police, she was held under Section 65 of the Delhi Police Act and let go once the related formalities were completed. She was released early on October 17.
AISA alleges that she was taken from one location to another for several hours and that her lawyers were not allowed to meet her. These are AISA’s allegations, and the material available does not include the police account on them.
What the preventive power allows
Section 126 BNSS lets an Executive Magistrate who receives information that a person is likely to breach the peace or disturb public tranquillity call on that person to show cause why a bond for keeping the peace, for up to one year, should not be taken. The power is preventive, and it is not a finding that the person has committed any offence. As the provision is generally read, Section 135(3) lets the magistrate direct an interim bond while the inquiry into the truth of the information goes on.
The protests behind it all
The detentions came during protests by student groups, opposition parties and civil society organisations against the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, along with demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The protesters say the revision risks leaving out eligible voters. The Delhi Police have relied on Section 163 BNSS and other restrictions in the area to maintain law and order.
AISA says the notice is meant to curb peaceful protest, and alleges that plain-clothes police have followed Bora since her release. In a separate matter, a Special Executive Magistrate on October 17 released Cockroach Janta Party founder Abhijeet Dipke on conditional bail in preventive proceedings under Sections 126 and 170 BNSS, subject to a bond to keep the peace for one year.
Where the matter stands
The High Court has not yet heard the petition or passed any order, and no view has been expressed on the merits. Whether the notice can stand, and whether the interim bond requirement is valid on these facts, will be decided only after the police and the petitioner have been heard.
Matter: Neha Bora v. Delhi Police (title and petition number not available at the time of writing)
Forum: Delhi High Court (vacation; reopens October 26, 2026)
Notice dated: October 18, 2026; SEM appearance fixed for October 19, 2026
Appearances: Abhik Chimni, Pranjal Abrol and Moksha, for the petitioner, as stated by AISA