Supreme Court: Stays Medha Roopam Salary Recovery Over NSA Detention

• The Supreme Court has stayed an Allahabad High Court order directing the recovery of ₹5 lakh from Noida DM Medha Roopam's salary.
• The High Court had ordered the compensation for the 'without application of mind' detention of student-activist Akriti Chaudhary under the NSA.
• The Supreme Court granted interim relief to both the DM and the Uttar Pradesh government, pausing the personal financial liability.
• The apex court issued notice to all parties and scheduled the next hearing for October 7.
• The High Court's original judgment, issued on September 2, had quashed Chaudhary's NSA detention.

The Supreme Court has temporarily halted an Allahabad High Court directive that mandated the recovery of ₹5 lakh in compensation from the salary of Gautam Buddh Nagar District Magistrate Medha Roopam.

The Supreme Court has temporarily halted an Allahabad High Court directive that mandated the recovery of ₹5 lakh in compensation from the salary of Gautam Buddh Nagar District Magistrate Medha Roopam. This significant interim relief, granted on Wednesday, addresses a case stemming from the detention of student-activist Akriti Chaudhary under the National Security Act (NSA). The apex court has issued a formal notice in the matter and scheduled the next hearing for October 7.

This decision provides a crucial pause for both DM Roopam, who was appointed District Magistrate of Gautam Buddh Nagar in July 2025, and the Uttar Pradesh government, who had challenged the High Court's order. The Allahabad High Court had not only quashed Chaudhary's detention but also ordered that the compensation amount be recouped directly from the salaries of officials deemed responsible, beginning with DM Roopam, who initially issued the detention order, and extending to the police officer involved in preparing the initial report. The Supreme Court's intervention specifically targets this personal financial liability.

The legal proceedings originated from the Allahabad High Court's judgment on September 2, which saw a Division Bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev overturn Akriti Chaudhary's NSA detention. Chaudhary, a 25-year-old history graduate from Delhi University, had been placed under the NSA following her involvement in an industrial workers' protest in Noida during April. Her detention was challenged via a habeas corpus petition.

In its ruling, the High Court went beyond merely quashing the detention. It reportedly characterized the District Magistrate's actions as an attempt to make an example of Chaudhary and discourage others from supporting protesting workers. The High Court concluded that the DM had acted "without application of mind," leading to its directive for the ₹5 lakh compensation to be paid to Chaudhary and recovered from the salaries of the implicated officers.

Before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi presented arguments on behalf of District Magistrate Medha Roopam, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the Uttar Pradesh government in a related Special Leave Petition. Both counsels strongly advocated for interim protection against the personal financial implications imposed by the High Court's order, pending a full hearing on the merits of the case. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves appeared on behalf of Akriti Chaudhary.

A bench of Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, after hearing all parties, issued an order stating that "till the matter is heard on merits, the operation of the impugned judgment, particularly, para Nos. 27 to 33 shall remain stayed." These specific paragraphs of the High Court's judgment are understood to contain the critical observations against the District Magistrate and the directions for personal liability regarding the compensation. An identical order was also issued in the State government's connected petition, underscoring the unified approach to the challenge.

The Supreme Court has granted permission for the District Magistrate to formally file her Special Leave Petition and has issued notice to the various respondents involved. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who had already filed a compilation of documents on behalf of Akriti Chaudhary, accepted the notice in open court and was granted two weeks to submit a formal reply. The other respondents, specifically numbers 2 through 6, were also given the same two-week period to respond.

The petitioner has been instructed to serve respondents 2 and 3 through their respective standing counsels, in addition to the standard service procedures. Both the District Magistrate's plea and the Uttar Pradesh government's connected Special Leave Petition, both arising from the same Allahabad High Court judgment, have been consolidated and are slated for further hearing on October 7, when the court will delve deeper into the substantive issues.

Source: Reporting based on court documents and legal news