JANTAR MANTAR STRIPPED OF PROTEST STATUS AS CJP VOWS TO TURN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY INTO A STAGE FOR DISSENT

October 12, 2026

Delhi Police has withdrawn Jantar Mantar’s status as a designated venue for protests and demonstrations, replacing the historic site with three alternative locations across the national capital. The decision triggered sharp criticism from Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Abhijeet Dipke and Saurav Das, who accused the Narendra Modi government of undermining the right to peaceful assembly and warned that the move would intensify, rather than suppress, public dissent.

In a standing order issued on Monday, October 12, Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar designated Ramlila Maidan, Burari Ground and CBD Ground as the new venues for public demonstrations. The decision followed recommendations made by a committee constituted by the Union Home Ministry to examine alternative locations where citizens could exercise their right to organise protests.

The order formally removes Jantar Mantar from the list of designated protest sites. Delhi Police said a revised standard operating procedure governing demonstrations at the three replacement venues would be issued separately, outlining the arrangements applicable to public gatherings at those locations.

The decision comes amid heightened tensions following the CJP’s proposed demonstration demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in electoral-roll revision. Delhi Police had refused permission for the planned October 10 gathering, citing security and public-order concerns, and deployed extensive forces to prevent protesters from assembling at Jantar Mantar.

The subsequent crackdown resulted in the detention of political leaders, student activists, lawyers and other demonstrators, provoking a wider controversy over the handling of peaceful protests in the capital. The Supreme Court had earlier asked the authorities to consider providing an alternative location with better facilities for demonstrators, leaving the choice of venue to the competent administrative authority. The court did not itself order Jantar Mantar to be denotified.

Reacting to Monday’s order, CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke accused the government of targeting the principle of protest itself. In a post on X, he argued that Jantar Mantar had already been transformed into a heavily secured zone during the recent demonstrations and said the latest decision would not deter the movement.

“Ab poora desh Jantar Mantar banega!” Dipke declared, meaning that the entire country would become Jantar Mantar. He further warned that removing the historic site’s designation could be followed by attempts to restrict democracy itself, portraying the decision as part of a broader effort to suppress public dissent.

CJP co-convenor Saurav Das also rejected the order, questioning whether the Union Home Ministry had consulted citizens, civil society organisations or groups regularly using Jantar Mantar before making the change. He argued that the site belonged to the people of India and described its denotification as an arbitrary assault on the fundamental right to peaceful protest and assembly.

Das challenged the government to explain why it was unwilling to allow demonstrations at a location long associated with public movements and political accountability. He maintained that changing the designated venue would not resolve the grievances motivating protesters and insisted that the campaign would continue.

Congress leader Jairam Ramesh joined the criticism, describing the decision as evidence of what he characterised as growing anxiety within the Prime Minister’s and Home Minister’s offices. He argued that Jantar Mantar had historically provided an important public platform for democratic expression and accused the government of responding to recent protests with excessive force.

The controversy has placed the future of one of Delhi’s most recognisable protest venues at the centre of a wider debate over democratic participation. Jantar Mantar has hosted political demonstrations, social movements, trade union gatherings and campaigns by citizens seeking to draw the attention of the government and the public to their grievances.

Supporters of the new arrangement may point to the possibility of managing crowds more effectively at larger designated grounds. However, critics argue that relocating protests must not become a means of making demonstrations less visible or more difficult to organise. The practical effect of the change will depend on the accessibility of the replacement sites and the procedures authorities establish for granting permission.

For the CJP, the decision has become another point of confrontation with the government following the detention of its leaders and supporters. The party maintains that its demand for Kumar’s resignation concerns electoral transparency and accountability, while the government and Election Commission have rejected allegations of deliberate electoral manipulation.

With Jantar Mantar no longer recognised as a designated protest venue, Delhi’s framework for public demonstrations has entered a new phase. Yet the strong reaction from the CJP and Congress indicates that the change is unlikely to end the dispute. Instead, the authorities’ decision has intensified questions about how the right to peaceful assembly can be exercised in practice and whether alternative protest sites will provide citizens with a meaningful platform to express dissent.