Delhi High Court Refuses to Stop CJP's Connaught Place Protest

The Delhi High Court on October 15 declined to stop a protest planned by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), led by Abhijeet Dipke, at Central Park in Connaught Place, New Delhi. The decision came after a petition raised concerns about possible disruption to businesses, traffic and public movement in the busy commercial area. The court recorded Delhi Police's assurance that appropriate measures would be taken to manage the gathering.

The petition was filed by Anil Kumar Gupta, a street vendor operating in Palika Bazar. He argued that demonstrations in central Delhi could affect traders' livelihoods, particularly during the festive season. His plea sought restrictions on protests at Connaught Place and other locations that are not designated demonstration sites.

During the hearing, Delhi Police informed the court that steps had already been taken to regulate the planned gathering and that further action would be taken if required under the law. The bench declined to issue an order restraining CJP from holding the protest. Consequently, the court's decision did not amount to a blanket ban on the demonstration.

CJP had announced its “Lehra Do Tiranga” demonstration for October 16 at 5 p.m. at Central Park in Connaught Place. Abhijeet Dipke called on supporters to gather with the national flag following the detention and judicial custody of CJP activists Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka in connection with earlier protests.

The demonstrations are part of a wider campaign demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. Critics have raised concerns about the revision process, while the Election Commission has denied wrongdoing. The allegations remain a central issue in the ongoing political dispute.

The court's decision leaves the planned protest subject to applicable laws and police regulation. Authorities face the task of managing public safety, traffic and access to businesses while handling the gathering. The outcome reflects the court's decision not to prohibit the demonstration in advance, while taking the police assurance on record.