Delhi High Court Questions CJP Leaders Over Peace Bond Violation

The Delhi High Court has raised serious questions regarding the actions of CJP leaders Saurabh Das and Ashutosh Ranka, who are accused of violating peace bonds during protests at Jantar Mantar. The court's inquiry focused on their unauthorized entry and the subsequent legal procedures that were allegedly overlooked. As the case unfolds, the court emphasized the importance of following legal protocols to maintain public order. This situation has sparked significant interest, especially given the broader implications for protest rights and public safety. Read on for a detailed account of the court's proceedings and the arguments presented by both sides.

By Narendra Chaudhary Oct 21, 2026, 14:07 IST

Court Interrogates CJP Leaders

In New Delhi, the Delhi High Court conducted a rigorous questioning session with the legal representatives of the Cockroach People's Party (CJP), specifically targeting leaders Saurabh Das and Ashutosh Ranka. The court sought explanations regarding their alleged unauthorized entry at Jantar Mantar and the supposed breach of their bail conditions.

On Tuesday, Das and Ranka approached the Delhi High Court to contest a ruling from a Special Executive Magistrate that extended their judicial custody in relation to a peace bond violation.

During the proceedings, the court noted that the petitioners had submitted their bail bonds on October 11, the same day Jantar Mantar was declared off-limits for protests, after which they were re-arrested. The court inquired why the established procedures under the Indian Citizen Security Code were not followed for the alleged breach of bail.

It is important to mention that Das and Ranka were detained at Terminal 3 of Indira Gandhi International Airport on October 10. Preventive action was initiated under sections 126 and 170 of the BNSS, and both individuals had posted bail bonds of ₹50,000 each.

On October 11, the Delhi Police revoked the authorization for protests at Jantar Mantar. This decision has been separately challenged in both the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court.

The current case is linked to an order issued by the Special Executive Magistrate of the Temple Marg police station on October 19, which extended the custody of both leaders by two days. The magistrate cited public peace and safety concerns, stating that CJP leaders were repeatedly calling for protests at de-notified sites, showing a lack of respect for the law. The police echoed this sentiment, arguing that their release could pose a threat to law and order.

The High Court remarked, "When your bail bonds are accepted and sureties are provided, there is a defined process for breach under the BNSS. Instead of following that process, which could involve the forfeiture of your bail, they seem to be showing leniency by possibly issuing you a new notice."

The court raised concerns about the petitioners' actions, questioning their decision to allegedly breach barricades during protests without proper authorization.

Referencing incidents of violence and arson in other countries, the court stated, "Barricades are placed for a reason... when you break them, it raises the risk of 10-20 others entering the area as well."

The court further commented, "We are observing what is happening outside our country... incidents of arson, etc. You may have started something you deem peaceful, but you need police permission to prevent antisocial elements from infiltrating your group and tarnishing your reputation."

Questioning the circumstances surrounding the protests, the court asked lawyer Chimni, "You went there, broke the barricade... without permission. We just want to understand what is happening here. Is this (the SEM's order) a revisable order?"

The court also inquired about the ages of Das and Ranka, to which Chimni responded that Saurabh is 27 and Ashutosh is 32 years old.

In response, the court remarked, "Then you are not 'Gen-Z.' The court has been informed that individuals born after 1997 are considered Gen-Z, so you do not fall into that category."