loader image

Notice to Student Over Cockroach Janta Party Protest Withdrawn: State Tells the Supreme Court

Notice to Student Over Cockroach Janta Party Protest Withdrawn: State Tells the Supreme Court

Akshat Tripathi v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., W.P.(Crl.) No. 368/2026 [Order dated September 27, 2026]

Student Protest Notice Withdrawn

The Supreme Court on Monday was informed that the show-cause notice issued to a Gautam Buddha University student over his involvement in the “Cockroach Janta Party” protest has been withdrawn by the Greater Noida Executive Magistrate.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana was hearing a plea filed by student Akshat Tripathi, who had challenged the notice issued to him under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

The notice had called upon Tripathi to furnish a personal bond of ₹5 lakh along with two sureties of the same amount, for encouraging fellow students to participate in a proposed CJP march. The proceedings invoked preventive provisions of the BNSS.

The student had approached the Supreme Court contending that the notice was contrary to the Court’s earlier directions concerning the student protests. The Supreme Court had on September 1 quashed FIRs registered against students who participated in the CJP-led protests and directed that no coercive action be taken against them.

The issue had earlier drawn strong observations from CJI Surya Kant, who had questioned how the Executive Magistrate could issue such a notice despite the Supreme Court’s earlier order. The CJI had said:

“

“How could a Magistrate dare to issue notice? We made clear no coercive action against any student. No Magistrate could violate that order.”

During the today’s hearing, ASG Aishwarya Bhati submitted that the impugned notice dated September 4 had already been withdrawn. However, counsel appearing for the petitioner stated that no such notice of withdrawal had been received by the petitioner. In view of the submission and the petitioner’s counsel disputing receipt of the withdrawal, the Supreme Court recorded the ASG’s statement in its order.