After Bombay High Court Orders Release Of CJP Members, Goa Police Justifies Detention Citing Past Violations, 'Patronising Umar Khalid'

A day after the Bombay High Court in a special and urgent Sunday sitting ordered the release of seven Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) members for staging protest in Panaji, the Goa Police on Monday (October 12) through an affidavit justified its move to detain the CJP members citing the 'past history' of the said outfit, wherein it was found to be 'patronising' Umar Khalid.

The Goa Police through Panaji Police Station's Inspector Vijaykumar Chodankar while justifying the detentions of the seven CJP members on Sunday (October 11) afternoon, cited at least three instances, wherein CJP members have organised protests without proper permissions. One such protest was for expressing solidarity with Sonam Wanghchuk, one for NEET Exams etc. 

"During the NEET protests on July 25, one of the agitator namely Mohammed Zanskar Danish (30) was found participated in a Dharna at Azad Maidan, with placard having written on it as 'Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Bhima Koregaon' and shoulder bag having written on it as 'Palestine will be free.' As there was possibility of law-and-order situation, said Mohammed Zanskar Danish was brought at the Police Station for further enquiry. However, hundreds of protestors gathered outside the police station and were requested not to create nuisance and not to block the road, so also, they were asked to show the permission issued by the competent authority to hold the Dharna in front of Police Head Quarters, Panaji, however they failed to produce permission and remain adamant and started demanding to release Danish and started giving slogan as 'Har Ghar me Umar Khalid jalme ga' etc" the affidavit reads. 

Further, the affidavit stated that the protestors continued to raise slogans against the Police and Government and demanded Danish's release. It further pointed out that another CJP member Sudeep Dalvi allegedly abused a female officer and later on touched her chest and outraged her modesty in front of the huge number of people gathered at the protest site and thus, a case was lodged against him too. 

With regards to the instant case, the affidavit stated that several CJP members and other people, mostly from outside Goa, had gathered at the main entrance of Azad Maidan and were shouting slogans against Union Government, Stale Government and CEC Gyanesh Kumar.

"I say that as they were not allowed to hold protest inside the Azad Maidan, Panaji, in accordance with the order dated October 9, 2026 of District Magistrate, North Goa, since there was a past history that the CJP protestors have violated the condition imposed by the Authorities and were patronising Umar Khalid, the Police arrangements were deployed as per the deployment scheme issued by the Superiors. The protestors forcibly barged inside the Azad Maidan, Panaji Goa and while in the process of barging inside the Azad Maidan, one of the protestors sustained minor injuries as he fell down. All the 07 CJP protestors were detained at 4:30 PM in accordance with provision of 172 (2) of BNSS Act 2023, as they did not have permission to hold any protest from the competent authority and were likely to create nuisance, which could lead law and order situation in Panaji area," the police said in the affidavit. 

Notably, Afreen Shaikh, Jack Sukhija, Bupesh Bind, Aditya Parulekar, Listan Noronha, Shamino Fernandes and Milind Rane were detained by the Goa Police on Sunday and challenging their detention, advocate Malisa Simoes moved a plea seeking an urgent hearing on Sunday evening.

A division bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit Jamsandekar granted urgent hearing of the matter and noted the allegation that there was no order passed under Section 163 of BNSS which prohibits any gathering at Azad Maidan, Panaji or any part of the location. It therefore, ordered the Police to forthwith release them on a condition that they would not resort to protests that night. 

"Considering that there are no prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, we are of the opinion that the detention may not have been authorised. We are also informed that the Executive Magistrate Dattaprasad Toraskar, who was present at the site, had given oral instructions to the police to detain the 7 persons since they had barged into Azad Maidan, Panaji. For the moment, without entering into controversy and the correctness of the detention order, considering that the Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the detainees, gives an Undertaking that the detainees would not protest at Azad Maidan, Panaji tonight, we direct the PI Panaji Police Station to release the 7 persons forthwith. This Undertaking given is without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised by the detainees," the judges said in the October 11 order. 

The bench had further directed the State to file its affidavit and in response to the same, the Goa Police denied the allegations of physical force used to detain the protestors. 

"The protesters were not arrested as such there was no question of any communications of ground of arrest. It is respectfully submitted that minimum required force was used to prevent the protesters from taking law in their hands and at that time no injuries was caused to any of the detainee. It is denied that they were roughly dragged into police van," the Police said. 

Taking the affidavits on record, the bench had adjourned the hearing till October 19.