Top court limits stay to rebuke and penalty against Noida DM; NSA quashing remains effective
The Supreme Court on Thursday revised an earlier order in a plea by Gautam Buddha Nagar District Magistrate Medha Roopam, clarifying that the stay it has granted applies only to the Allahabad High Court’s strictures and the direction to recover ₹5 lakh from her salary, and not to the High Court’s quashing of the detention under the National Security Act (NSA) of Delhi University student Akriti Chaudhary.
The revised order by a bench of Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice N Kotiswar Singh stated:
“After hearing learned Senior Counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that till the matter is heard on merits, the operation of para nos. 27 to 33 of the impugned judgment including award of costs and strictures against the District Magistrate shall remain stayed.”The bench said these paragraphs relate to the High Court’s rebuke of Roopam and the direction for compensation to be recovered from her salary.
Chaudhary, who is lodged in Kasna Jail, was arrested in April in connection with a workers’ protest in Noida and was subsequently booked under the NSA, according to court records cited in the litigation. By its order on September 2, the Allahabad High Court had quashed her NSA detention and taken a strong view of the manner in which the detention order was passed by the District Magistrate, directing payment of ₹5 lakh from Roopam’s salary as compensation.
The earlier version of the Supreme Court order had stated that the operation of the impugned judgment, “particularly para Nos. 27 to 33 shall remain stayed”, which created confusion about whether the stay extended to the High Court’s quashing of Chaudhary’s detention. The clarification issued on Thursday narrowed the stay to the strictures and cost order, leaving the quashing of the NSA detention outside the stay.
What the High Court had said
In its September 2 judgment, the Allahabad High Court not only quashed the NSA detention but also criticised Roopam’s conduct, observing — as recorded in the Supreme Court order — that her “conduct… is worthy of derision” and that she was “guilty of violating her oath of allegiance” to the Constitution. The High Court’s direction to recover compensation from the DM’s salary aimed to censure what it described as an abuse of power in the exercise of statutory authority.
- Accused/Detained: Akriti Chaudhary — arrested after a Noida workers’ protest in April, lodged in Kasna Jail.
- Official criticised: District Magistrate Medha Roopam — High Court imposed strictures and ordered recovery of ₹5 lakh from her salary.
- Supreme Court action: Stayed operation of paragraphs 27–33 of the High Court judgment (strictures and costs) pending hearing on merits; clarified quashing of NSA detention was not stayed.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| April (this year) | Workers’ protest in Noida; arrest of Akriti Chaudhary and NSA booking |
| 2 September | Allahabad High Court quashes NSA detention; imposes strictures and orders recovery of ₹5 lakh from DM’s salary |
| Earlier order (Wednesday) | Supreme Court wording caused uncertainty over whether quashing of detention was stayed |
| Thursday | Supreme Court revises order: stay limited to para nos. 27–33 (strictures and costs), not quashing of NSA detention |
The Supreme Court said the matter will be heard on merits at a later date. The revised order was passed after hearing senior counsel for the parties; the bench observed that clarification was necessary to remove any confusion caused by the earlier phrasing of its interim order.
The case has drawn attention locally because it touches on two sensitive issues for Noida residents: the use of preventive detention laws such as the NSA in the aftermath of protests, and the accountability of district-level administrative officials when courts find procedural or constitutional lapses. The High Court’s strictures had warned against unchecked exercise of power by police and officials in Uttar Pradesh, observing that such conduct risked serious erosion of constitutional safeguards.
The legal fight will now move to consideration on merits before the Supreme Court, with the interim position preserving the High Court’s rebuke and cost order from immediate operation while leaving the quashing of the NSA detention intact for the time being.
