The Delhi High Court on Thursday, October 15, declined to restrain the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) and its founder, Abhijeet Dipke, from holding a protest at Central Park in Connaught Place, New Delhi, on Friday, October 16. The court recorded the Delhi Police’s assurance that all possible legal measures would be taken to regulate the gathering and address concerns about public order. The decision came while hearing a petition filed by a Palika Bazar vendor concerned about traffic disruption, business losses and the impact of repeated demonstrations during the festive season.
The proposed ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ protest is linked to the recent detention of CJP leaders and the party’s demand for Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation over alleged irregularities in electoral rolls. Meanwhile, the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) announced that Central Park would remain closed to the general public on October 16 and 17, citing administrative reasons, adding another layer of uncertainty around the gathering.
Court Weighs Protest Rights
The case was heard by a bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma. The petition was filed by Anil Kumar Gupta, a street vendor operating in Palika Bazar, who sought directions to prevent disruption in Connaught Place and other parts of central Delhi.
The petitioner argued that Central Park was not a designated protest venue and that barricading, traffic restrictions and security arrangements could affect traders, pedestrians and commuters. His counsel warned that traders and vendors could suffer further losses if another weekend was disrupted during the festive season. Representing Delhi Police, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma told the court that authorities had already taken steps to control the proposed gathering.
He assured the bench that the concerns raised by the petitioner would be addressed and that all necessary measures would be taken in accordance with the law. When the petitioner’s counsel pressed for a specific order preventing the protest, the judges responded, “Don’t insist. We have passed the order.” The court ultimately declined to issue a restraining order. However, its decision should not be interpreted as an unconditional approval of every aspect of the demonstration; the court recorded the police’s assurance to regulate the gathering under existing legal provisions. The matter has been listed for further consideration on November 3.
Why CJP Planned March
The proposed demonstration, called ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’, follows the detention and subsequent judicial custody of CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka. The two were sent to five days of judicial custody and lodged in Tihar Jail after police accused them of entering Jantar Mantar, which is no longer a designated protest site, and violating conditions linked to their peace bonds.
Police also alleged that CJP members breached barricades and raised slogans demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The party has been protesting against alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, a process that has drawn criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups. The Election Commission has denied allegations that the exercise was intended to favour the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.
Dipke has called on supporters to assemble at Central Park with the national flag at 5 pm on October 16, maintaining that waving the Tricolour is not a crime. He has also urged supporters to organise similar marches in other cities. Meanwhile, the NDMC announced that Central Park would remain closed to the general public on October 16 and 17 for what it described as “administrative reasons”.
The civic body did not explicitly link the closure to the proposed demonstration. Delhi Police have also identified Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground and CBD Ground in Shahdara as alternative protest venues after removing Jantar Mantar from the list of designated sites. The Supreme Court had called for suitable alternative locations where people could exercise their right to protest without compromising public safety.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The developments in Delhi highlight the need to balance the democratic right to peaceful protest with the everyday needs of residents, commuters, traders and small vendors whose livelihoods depend on access to public spaces. Peaceful demonstrations are an important part of a democracy, allowing citizens to question institutions, raise concerns and demand accountability.
At the same time, authorities have a responsibility to ensure that public safety is protected and that restrictions are proportionate, transparent and consistent with the law. The concerns raised by Palika Bazar traders deserve consideration, particularly when disruptions can affect people who rely on daily earnings to support their families. Equally, the grievances raised by CJP must be addressed through fair procedures and open dialogue rather than unnecessary confrontation.
Also Read: ‘Modi Doesn’t Need US Support’: How Mary Millben And Abhijeet Dipke’s War Of Words Escalated
