Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke and members Ashutosh Ranka and Saurav Das were detained by Delhi Police on Saturday, October 10, 2026, after arriving in the national capital for a planned protest at Jantar Mantar demanding Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation. According to sources as reported by NDTV, Dipke was taken to Gurugram, Ranka to Dwarka and Das to another location in Delhi.
The proposed demonstration, organised amid allegations of irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, was scheduled to seek accountability from the Election Commission of India (ECI).
The detentions came amid heightened security, restrictions on public gatherings and the denial of permission for the protest. While CJP has maintained that its agitation is intended to challenge alleged electoral irregularities, authorities have cited security and public-order concerns in their handling of the planned mobilisation. The ECI has previously defended its electoral-roll revision process, stating that the exercise is intended to ensure accurate voter lists.
Leaders Detained Before Protest
The detentions of Dipke, Ranka and Das came as CJP prepared to mobilise supporters in Delhi for its planned demonstration against the CEC. The three leaders had travelled to the capital to participate in the protest at Jantar Mantar, a designated protest site that has hosted numerous demonstrations over political and public-interest issues.
According to reports, Delhi Police detained the CJP leaders at the Indira Gandhi International Airport after their arrival. Sources subsequently indicated that they were taken to different locations: Dipke to Gurugram, Ranka to Dwarka and Das to another location in Delhi. The reported dispersal of the leaders across different locations came ahead of the planned gathering, raising questions about whether organisers would be able to assemble and proceed with the demonstration.
Dipke had previously indicated that he was prepared to face detention while travelling to Delhi for the protest. He also criticised the security arrangements and restrictions, alleging that the authorities were attempting to prevent people from participating in the demonstration. These remarks reflect the organisers’ position, although the allegations of deliberate political suppression have not been independently established.
The Delhi Police had denied permission for the proposed gathering and reportedly instructed personnel to detain people attempting to stage demonstrations in violation of the restrictions. The action formed part of wider security measures introduced across the capital ahead of the mobilisation. However, the precise legal grounds communicated to each of the three leaders, and whether formal arrest procedures were initiated in their individual cases, require further official clarification.
SIR Controversy Behind The Agitation
The proposed demonstration is part of CJP’s campaign against the ECI’s handling of the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The exercise, which involves reviewing voter lists and identifying entries that may require correction or removal, has become a major point of contention among opposition parties, student groups and civil society organisations.
CJP and other critics have raised concerns that the revision process could lead to eligible voters being excluded from electoral rolls, particularly if documentation requirements and verification procedures create difficulties for vulnerable communities. They have demanded accountability from the CEC and called for changes to the way electoral-roll revisions are conducted. The protest was also intended to demand Kumar’s resignation and greater transparency in the electoral process.
The Election Commission, however, has defended the revision exercise, maintaining that electoral rolls must be accurate and that the process is intended to address issues such as duplicate entries and the inclusion of deceased or otherwise ineligible individuals. Allegations that the exercise has been manipulated to benefit a particular political party remain disputed and should not be treated as established facts without supporting evidence.
The latest mobilisation follows earlier demonstrations in Delhi and Mumbai on October 2, when protesters demanded Kumar’s resignation over concerns about the electoral-roll revision process. CJP subsequently announced that it would organise a larger demonstration at Jantar Mantar on October 10 if the CEC did not step down. The party also sought to bring together citizens and student organisations around its demands.
Ahead of Saturday’s planned protest, Delhi witnessed an extensive security deployment, with barricades, restrictions on public gatherings and additional police personnel in sensitive areas. Authorities had invoked Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which enables restrictions on certain assemblies and activities to prevent potential disturbances. Reports also indicated restrictions on movement and public access in parts of central Delhi. The scale of the security arrangements and the detention of organisers have intensified the debate over how authorities should balance public order with citizens’ right to express dissent.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The right to peaceful protest is an essential part of a functioning democracy, particularly when citizens raise concerns about electoral transparency and the fairness of institutions responsible for safeguarding the voting process. At the same time, public demonstrations must remain peaceful, and authorities have a responsibility to protect public safety without imposing restrictions that are broader than necessary.
Also Read: 28 Students Fall Ill At Telangana Women’s Polytechnic Hostel; Food Poisoning Suspected
