A Shivaji Park resident and advocate, Siddhi Deolekar, has filed a complaint with the Mumbai Police against Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke and three other leaders over the group’s October 2 protest in Mumbai.
The complainant alleged that the demonstration went ahead despite police denying permission and caused inconvenience by spilling onto roads near residential buildings. CJP, meanwhile, has maintained that it was exercising its right to protest as part of its nationwide “Jail Bharo Andolan” demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation.
Mumbai Police had denied permission citing concerns including traffic congestion, noise pollution and disruption to the movement of patients, but the protest ultimately took place with a heavy police presence and was reported to have remained largely peaceful.
Complaint Over Disruption
Deolekar, who told ANI that she has lived near Shivaji Park for about 10 years, said she was not opposed to the right to protest but objected to the gathering being held on roads outside residential premises after permission for the event had been denied.
The complaint names Dipke, CJP chief spokesperson Saurav Das, national spokesperson Ashutosh Ranka and legal affairs head Ratna Singh. Deolekar alleged that the organisers proceeded despite restrictions linked to a 2013 Bombay High Court order and a subsequent Maharashtra government order governing activities at Shivaji Park. “I am not against protests. Everyone has the right to protest, but there are designated places for protests,” she said, according to ANI.
She suggested that protesters use locations such as Azad Maidan or Jantar Mantar instead. Deolekar also said she approached the police because she and other residents “simply needed assistance and wanted to feel secure”, and thanked Mumbai Police for responding to their concerns.
As a responsible Shivaji Park citizen I have lodged complaint against @abhijeet_dipke , @AshutoshRanka @SauravDassss and @whattalawyer at Shivaji Park Police Station for allegedly attempting to proceed with the Shivaji Park Protest and gathering huge crowd despite express denial… pic.twitter.com/mEroyNwaks
— Siddhi Deolekar (@siddhi7x) October 2, 2026
Police Denial And Protest
The complaint follows a dispute over permission for the October 2 gathering. Mumbai Police had earlier refused permission for the CJP protest at Shivaji Park, citing the Bombay High Court’s 2013 order and Maharashtra government guidelines, along with concerns over noise, traffic and access for patients travelling to nearby hospitals.
CJP responded by announcing a “Jail Bharo Andolan”, with Dipke arguing that denying permission amounted to suppressing citizens’ voices. On October 2, thousands nevertheless gathered near Shivaji Park. According to Mumbai Police sources cited by The Times of India, the crowd reached around 9,000–10,000, while between 1,000 and 1,500 police personnel, including reserve staff, were deployed. Police prevented protesters from entering the Shivaji Park maidan, with the gathering instead taking place on an adjoining road.
A police official said arrangements were made “to avoid inconvenience to the public, particularly local residents”, including clearing roads and preventing parking. A senior Maharashtra minister told TOI that Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis had given police “total freedom” to ensure that a democratic protest remained peaceful.
Why CJP Is Protesting
The Mumbai action is part of CJP’s wider campaign seeking Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation as Chief Election Commissioner. The group has cited concerns surrounding the Election Commission’s functioning and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The demand gained momentum following an Indian Express report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections to several poll-panel decisions over a 10-month period, including matters concerning electoral rolls and SIR. The Election Commission has rejected the suggestion that the reported differences indicated a breakdown in decision-making, stating that individual views and suggestions are part of deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body and that final decisions, including those on SIR, were taken unanimously.
The October 2 protest in Mumbai also featured public figures, including actor Naseeruddin Shah and musician Vishal Dadlani, while Dipke praised the Mumbai Police for its handling of the gathering. Reports from the city said the demonstration continued peacefully despite the earlier denial of permission.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
The right to peaceful protest is an important part of a democracy, just as residents have a legitimate interest in safety, access to their homes, traffic movement and everyday life.
The events at Shivaji Park underline the need to balance both rights through dialogue, clear communication and responsible policing. Protest organisers should ensure that demonstrations remain peaceful and minimise disruption to surrounding communities, while authorities should facilitate lawful dissent wherever possible and communicate restrictions transparently.
Disagreements over electoral institutions and public policy deserve space for debate, but that debate is strongest when citizens, organisers and authorities can coexist without intimidation or unnecessary confrontation. How can cities better protect the right to protest while also ensuring that local communities are not unfairly disrupted?
