Allahabad HC quashes NSA student’s detention, calls case a ‘fabricated story’

Akriti Chaudhary was among several activists arrested in cases related to the protest held between April 10 and 18, during which industrial and contract workers demanded higher wages and parity with wages paid in neighboring Haryana. File | Photo credit: Special arrangement

The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday (September 2, 2026) quashed the detention of Delhi University law student Akriti Chaudhary under the National Security Act (NSA). The 25-year-old spent nearly five months in custody over the workers’ protest in Noida in April this year.

Also read | Four months after the Noida protest, workers are facing financial problems and cannot find work

Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev granted Ms Chaudhary’s habeas corpus plea and ordered her immediate release unless she was sought in another case. The court noted inconsistencies in the arrest notice and called the state’s version a “fabricated story”.

Speaking to The Hindu, advocate Charlie Prakash, who represented Ms Chaudhary along with senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, confirmed that the court had canceled the remand. “The court found major irregularities in the state account of her arrest and detention. The court also asked the Noida DM to pay her a compensation of ₹5 lakh,” he added.

A detailed order in the matter is awaited.

Ms. Chaudhary was among several activists arrested in cases related to the protest held between April 10 and 18, during which industrial and contract workers demanded higher wages and parity with wages paid in neighboring Haryana. On April 13, the protest turned violent and roads were blocked.

The Uttar Pradesh police called the NSA against Ms Chaudhary a month later, alleging that she had incited protesters to engage in stone-pelting and arson. During a press conference, police claimed they had “strong electronic and video evidence” against her.

Ms. Chaudhary argued in her motion that she was already in custody before the April 13 violence began. She said there was no factual basis for her detention and the process leading to her preventive detention was procedurally and substantively flawed.

The state told the court that Ms. Chaudhary was arrested at 10:56 am on April 12 and was issued a warning under Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. Justice Sreedharan questioned why no notice was issued before the warning.

The State accepted that no notice under Section 126 had been served. The court then asked for production of a general police diary which showed that Ms Chaudhary had been arrested even before the notice was prepared. The court asked if she had been brought before a magistrate before her arrest and asked for evidence of incitement.

The state told the court that protesters had gathered at the site on April 11, but the court pointed out that according to police records there was no violence that day. The state also did not produce video footage showing Ms Chaudhary allegedly provoking protesters to throw stones or set fire to vehicles.

Published – 02 Sep 2026 19:03 IST