'You are not Gen-Z': Delhi HC declines relief to CJP's Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka; asks them to await SEM hearing

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to intervene in the judicial custody of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) co-conveners Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka, asking them to await the outcome of a hearing before the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) later in the day and approach the appellate court if their grievance persists.

Justice Subramonium Prasad allowed the duo to withdraw their petition, observing that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was not the appropriate remedy in a case involving an alleged repeat violation of a bond to maintain peace.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma informed the court that the matter was listed before the SEM regarding the furnishing of fresh sureties.

The CJP leaders had moved the high court seeking urgent relief against the SEM's October 19 order remanding them to two days of judicial custody. The High Court took up the plea despite being closed for the Dussehra break.

Advocate Abhik Chimni, appearing for Das and Ranka, argued that they should be released on personal bonds, contending that the SEM lacked jurisdiction to extend their judicial custody. He also challenged the insistence on sureties, arguing that the duo had submitted the required documents multiple times.

The petition alleged that they had remained in custody for six days despite furnishing sureties. It also challenged the SEM's decision under Section 135(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), arguing that the custody was based on a failure to execute the required bond, even though valid sureties had been submitted on October 19.

The plea further alleged that the mandatory procedure under Section 140 of the BNSS had not been followed while rejecting the sureties.

Justice Prasad observed that the petitioners had allegedly violated a bond to maintain tranquillity by entering a protest site that had been denotified. He questioned whether authorities could seek stricter sureties in an alleged repeat violation.

The judge also said questions about the petitioners' motives and the nature of their protest should be examined in appropriate proceedings. Referring to remarks about "regime change", he said such issues were not required to be examined in the present hearing.

When informed that Das and Ranka were 27 and 31 years old, respectively, the court remarked, "That means you are not Gen-Z." Their counsel responded that the two were an inspiration.

The court also observed that police permission for protests was intended not to prevent demonstrations but to keep unwanted elements from joining and to ensure that peaceful protests did not turn violent.

"When you go and break a barricade, the chances of 10 or 20 more people violating the 163 (prohibitory order) are very bright," the judge said, cautioning that a protest could escalate if participants lost control of the situation.

The court clarified that it had made no observations on the merits of the case while permitting the petitioners to withdraw their plea.

Das and Ranka were detained on October 13 along with other CJP workers after allegedly climbing over a locked gate to enter Jantar Mantar, which had been denotified as a designated protest site. They displayed the national flag and raised slogans against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar before being taken into preventive custody.

A SEM initially remanded them to five days of judicial custody on October 14. On October 19, a newly appointed SEM at Mandir Marg police station ordered their judicial remand for two more days, until October 21.

The CJP leaders challenged the order as illegal and arbitrary, arguing that delays in accepting and verifying their sureties had obstructed their release.
(With PTI inputs)