'They're Not Terrorists, Only Demanding Basic Wages' : Supreme Court Orders Production Of Two Arrested Over Noida Workers' Protest

The Supreme Court today (May 15) directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to produce Aditya Anand, and Rupesh Roy, who were arrested during the recent Noida workers' protest, before the Court on May 18 at 2 pm.

The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by Keshaw Anand, brother of Aditya Anand, alleging that the UP Police was subjected the arrested persons to custodial torture.

A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice to the State, and directed the production of the two persons. During the hearing today, the Court remarked that the two accused persons were merely protesting for the increase in wages, and there is no reason why they have been treated as "terrorists".

"They are not terrorists; they are merely demanding basic rights like minimum wages," Justice Nagarathna orally remarked to the State counsel.

The Court said that subscribing to a "leftist ideology" doesn't make someone a criminal.

The bench has also passed an order that they should continue to be in judicial custody, as against the apprehension made by the counsels that the State is intending to move them to police remand.

As per the petition, while Aditya Anand is a software engineer and a social worker, while Rupesh Roy is an auto driver. Both participated in the protest for an increase in minimum wage and decent working hours for the workers.

It is contended that Aditya was arrested on April 17 at the Tiruchirappalli railway station in Tamil Nadu, without disclosure of the grounds of arrest and without providing an arrest memo. It is claimed that he was not allowed to inform his family or legal counsel about the arrest. Aditya made several representations to the multiple authorities in the States of Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh regarding his detention; he was not granted transit remand.

He was then taken to Uttar Pradesh, where he was arrested under Sections 191(1), 191(2), 115(2), 121(1), 121(2), 125(1), 351(3), 352, 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. As for Rupesh, it is contended that he was subjected to severe torture, and the police made a fake disclosure and recovery to implicate him. He had also addressed the labour protests and was taken by the police officers from the Botanical Garden metro station.

Case Details: KESHAW ANAND Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH|W.P.(Crl.) No. 174/2026

Click Here To Read Order

Appearances: For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv. Mr. Manik Gupta, Adv. Ms. Puja Sharma, AOR;

Ms. Shahrukh Alam, Adv. Ms. Deeksha Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Paras Nath Singh

For Respondent(s) :Mr. Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, A.A.G. Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR Mr. S.Subramaniam, Adv. Ms. Aayushi Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Aniket Tiwari, Adv.