Student protests can escalate into arson, looting: Delhi HC cites France riots during CJP’s Ranka, Das’ hearing

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday referred to incidents of arson and unrest in other countries, including France, while hearing a plea by Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka challenging the extension of their judicial custody. The court warned that protests that begin peacefully can escalate when more people join and prohibitory orders are violated.

Questioning the activists’ conduct, the court pointed out that they were allegedly at the forefront of the demonstration and had breached barricades without permission. It stressed that barricades and police permissions serve a purpose, including preventing unwanted elements from joining a gathering and causing disruption.

“We are seeing what is happening outside our country… Arson etc. You may have started with something you say is peaceful. For that purpose you take police permission which is to prevent unwanted persons who join your group and spoil your name,” the court observed, according to Bar and Bench.

The judge also warned that breaking barricades could encourage more people to join in violation of prohibitory orders.

“Barricade is there for a purpose… and when you break the barricade, there is a chance of 10-20 people coming,” the court said.

Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing the petition against an October 19 order by a Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) extending the activists’ custody until October 21. The case relates to their alleged attempt to unfurl the national flag at Jantar Mantar on October 13, after the site was denotified as a designated protest venue.

The petitioners sought the quashing of the SEM’s order, their immediate release and a stay on the extension of their custody. They argued that their continued detention was illegal and infringed their right to personal liberty.

Their counsel, Abhik Chimni, submitted that the activists had remained in custody since October 13 despite furnishing sureties. The petitioners also claimed that additional sureties and documents were available on October 19 but were not allowed to be submitted.

However, Justice Prasad questioned whether the impugned order could be challenged through a revision petition instead of invoking the High Court’s writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

“Your second incident. You are a person who has actually broken a bond. Your remedy actually lies in revision,” the court observed, as reported by Bar and Bench.

The judge suggested that the petitioners consider withdrawing the plea, await the proceedings before the SEM and then assess their legal options.

During the hearing, the court also asked about the ages of the two CJP leaders. When Chimni said Das was 27 and Ranka was 32, the judge remarked, “Then you are not Gen Z. What is Gen Z?”

After being told that people born after 1997 were considered Gen Z, the court repeated, “Then you are not Gen Z.”