Prayagraj: Allahabad high court on Wednesday quashed the detention of a 25-year-old Delhi University history graduate, who was taken into custody under stringent National Security Act in connection with the Noida workers’ protest in April 2026.Allowing the habeas corpus petition, a division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev found that the detention of Akriti Chaudhari was based on a ‘concocted’ story by the police.The court directed her immediate release if arrest was not warranted in any other case. However, sources say Chaudhary will continue to remain in custody, as she is yet to secure bail in various cases registered in connection with the protest.The development came after the court examined the sequence of her arrest and the issuance of notices under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and found several procedural lapses.The court also directed the payment of Rs 5 lakh as compensation to Chaudhary. The detailed order is awaited.During the hearing, govt informed the court that Chaudhary had been arrested at 10:56 am on April 12, 2026, and that a notice was issued to her as per law.The state alleged that she had instigated the mob to resort to arson and stone-pelting.However, the court observed that proper notice was not served as per law and questioned the state’s version based on the general diary (GD) entry.It noted that the record appeared to show that Chaudhary had already been arrested before the notice was prepared.On Tuesday, the court had asked the state to show footage indicating whether Chaudhary had instigated protesters. The state had sought time to produce the video, but the bench had declined to grant further time, noting that Chaudhary had already spent five months in jail.Earlier, the court had also asked whether there was material showing that she had asked protesters to set vehicles on fire. When the state said the chargesheet had been filed, Justice Sreedharan had observed: “Once the chargesheet is filed, you should have seen where the witnesses have named her.”The state then relied upon witness statements naming Chaudhary.However, the bench specifically asked for videography showing her allegedly instigating protesters.
