The demand by a special executive magistrate that student leader Neha Bora should furnish a peace bond of Rs 10,000 raises the uncomfortable question about whether the state is aiming to maintain public order or restrict dissent.
Peace bonds – legal promises to maintain public peace – are intended to prevent violence. But their use against protesters reiterates that in a democracy, the absence of protest is not proof of public peace.
Bora emphasised this in an article in The Indian Express on October 24. “What is this peace that I am being asked to maintain?” they asked. “...Is it the silence that follows when protesters have been dispersed, detained or frightened into staying home? Can we call a society peaceful because those experiencing injustice have been prevented from speaking about it?”
On October 16, Bora, the national president of the All India Students Association, was detained on their way to a protest in central Delhi. Released the following morning, they received a notice asking why they should not furnish a Rs 10,000 peace bond, supported by a surety. A surety is another person who agrees to be financially liable if the bond’s conditions are breached.
Bora has not been convicted of any offence. The police sought this undertaking because they...