New Delhi: The Allahabad high court on Wednesday (September 16) issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government regarding its reply in a habeas corpus petition filed by Satyam Verma, a Lucknow-based freelance writer and former journalist, challenging his preventive detention under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980, for his alleged participation in the Noida workers’ protest in April.A bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev has sought the responses from the state authorities and posted the matter for October 7, LiveLaw reported.The detention order was passed on May 12 by the District Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar, under Section 3(2), read with Section 3(3) of the NSA. The UP government’s approval order came on May 20, under Section 3(4), and the subsequent order dated June 10, 2026, under Section 12(1) of the Act.Verma’s petition seeks quashing of the detention and consequential orders, as well as his immediate release and compensation for his alleged illegal detention. His counsel has told the court that the order was based on a “factually impossible” premise that Verma was involved in the violence in Noida on April 13.According to the CCTV footage and Call Detail Records (CDRs), the petition states, Verma was in Lucknow at the time, not Noida, and was allegedly detained by the Hasanganj Police at 2:14 PM on the same day. This, it notes, is an “ironclad alibi” and the NSA detention order, thus, is based on “physically impossible and demonstrably false premises” and is liable to be quashed.The Wire has previously reported, at length, about the bizarre nature of documents submitted by the Noida Police before District Magistrate Medha Roopam, for invoking the NSA against Satyam Verma and others.A review of annexures and case diaries that form part of the investigation by the Noida Police also shows that implicating journalist Satyam Verma is based on hearsay presented as the testimony of a police informant who won’t be answerable before a court of law. The state has allegedly characterised Verma’s professional income as “riot funding”, which the petition has challenged. According to LiveLaw, the petition states that the NSA was used to “crush a spontaneous and lawful labour demand”, and that the material relied upon by the authorities, even taken at its highest, concerned a localised labour dispute over minimum wages, which, according to Verma, falls within the domain of “law and order” and does not constitute a threat to “public order” warranting prevention detention.It further alleges violation of Verma’s fundamental rights and attempts to restrict and suppress his right to make a representation, and upon a hearing before the Advisory Board, attempts to prevent him from adequately preparing his defence or seeking assistance.Verma relied upon the high court’s order concerning co-detenue Akriti Chaudhary, arguing that it had quashed a similarly worded detention order passed on the same date by the same authority and arising from the same agitation. Meanwhile, a day ago, the high court also deferred Verma’s bail plea in one of the 11 criminal cases registered against him in connection with the Noida protests as the state authorities sought time to file objections. The court had earlier indicated in open court that Verma would be granted bail on parity with a co-accused who had been granted bail in the same case on June 23.