THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT sharply criticized Gautam Buddha Nagar District Magistrate Medha Roopam, who issued an order to detain a 25-year-old Delhi University (DU) graduate under the National Security Act (NSA) over her participation in the Noida Workers’ protest in April this year. The court released its detailed order on Monday, September 7, 2026, observing that District Magistrate (DM) Medha Roopam’s order to detain Akriti under NSA reflects the ‘desire to set a precedent’ for the future cases—the ones involving the right to free speech and expression.
The Court Bench—headed by Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev—nullified the NSA detention of Akriti Chaudhary, while expressing their grave concerns over such irregular use of administrative and political authority.
The growing inflation, along with the rising prices of oil and essential commodities have impacted the commoners in India to a great extent. It was only a matter of time that a major workers’ outburst over these issues would take shape in the country. Following suit, one such incident took place in Noida—located in the National Capital Region (NCR)—where hundreds of workers took to the streets, demanding an increase in the minimum wages for the factory workers, reviewing of the eight-hour workday violations, and the increasing informalization of the workforce from April 10 to April 18, 2026.
The demonstrations intensified, with the workers raising slogans, pausing their work, and staging their sit-in outside the factory premises. Ultimately, the UP government announced a 20%-21% increase in the minimum wages, effective retroactively from April 1, 2026.
However, as the protests came to a close, the Uttar Pradesh government began to systematically crackdown on the protesters, of which the invocation of NSA against Akriti Chaudhury was a significant part. The UP police invoked the National Security Act (NSA) against Akriti, stating her alleged involvement in instigating the protesters to indulge in violence and arson during the protests. The police also informed in an official press conference that they had found ‘strong electronic and videographic evidence’ against her. Since then, the UP police detained Akriti, and she had been in custody for almost five months.
See Also: SC Quashes FIRs Over July 20-25 Student Protests Across Country, CJP Withdraws Sep 5 Protest March
Akriti was arrested by the police from Botanical Garden Metro Station along with four others on April 11, 2026—two days before the protest turned violent. Alongside Akriti, Satyam Verma was also arrested by the UP police from Lucknow on April 17. Satyam Verma is a senior journalist and also a public intellectual associated with Janchetana books and Jagaruk Nagrik Mancha (Platform for Citizens’ Awareness). On May 13, 2026—a month after the protest—the UP police invoked the NSA against Akriti and Satyam.
After almost five months, Akriti filed a habeas corpus petition under Article 32 of the Indian constitution, arguing her wrongful detention by the UP police officials. She argued that the police had already taken her under custody on April 11—two days before the violence broke out. Furthermore, she also stated that there was no factual basis or legal rationale for her detention.
Responding to the appeal, the Bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev allowed the petition and ordered her immediate release. Citing the District magistrate’s responsibility in the entire situation, the court expressed a deep concern over the potential irregularities revealed in this case. The Bench noted, “In this case, the conduct of the District Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar, who passed the impugned order, is worthy of derision.” This incident is highly concerning, as a sitting administrative officer has been flagged by the high court for operating without any credible source, material or evidence.
While nullifying the actions of the UP Police and the DM, the court also observed that the District Magistrate ‘desired to set an example’ out of the petitioner and further deter others from their right to free speech and expression in public spaces in support of workers.
Social workers, human rights activists, journalists, and other members of the civil society were regularly protesting against the detention of Akriti, Satyam and the others. The high court Bench responded to their concerns and referred to George Orwell’s famous novels ‘1984’ and ‘Animal Farm’ in its ruling. According to a report by LiveLaw, the court highlighted their concerns on the breakdown of a democratic order in Uttar Pradesh. The court said, “It shan’t be long before the errant in the bureaucracy reduces the state of Uttar Pradesh to an Orwellian Dystopia,” reported LiveLaw.
The Court also held Gautam Buddha Nagar District Magistrate Medha Roopam, as ‘guilty of violating her oath of allegiance, making this a case for the imposition of compensation to the petitioner.’ In this light, the court directed that Akriti Chaudhary ought to be compensated with Rs 5 lakh from the salary of the DM Medha Roopam and all other police officers who were party to this act. It held the DM’s actions in critical light, stating that the order of detention was passed ‘without the application of mind.’
See Also: Junaid Malik, CJP Protest Food Volunteer, Moves Supreme Court Alleging Family Harassment and Illegal Detention
The police further informed the court that they did not issue any ‘show-cause’ notice to Akriti before issuing the warning notice under the Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). As the court probed further, it was also found that no notice was served under Section 126, and that Akriti was arrested even before the preparation of the notice by the Police. Both these sections of the BNSS relate to the issuance of show-cause notice and the maintenance of peace.
Contrary to their claims, the police also could not show any video-footage evidence of Akriti provoking protesters to stone pelt or light-up police vehicles.
Suggested Reading:
Subscribe to our channels on YouTube and WhatsApp
Download our app on Play Store