Update at 1:01 am: The Advocates who filed the petition has clarified that the petition is not filed by the Cockroach Janta Party in its official capacity. As per latest developments, the petitioner Gaurav Bharti, has sought withdrawal.

Cockroach Janata Party member has filed a habeas corpus petition in the Supreme Court seeking production and release of its founder Abhijeet Dipke, co-convenor Saurav Das, spokesperson Ashutosh Ranka and other persons allegedly detained in connection with the party's proposed protest in Delhi on October 10 over issues concerning the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The petition has been instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by Gaurav Bharti, CJP Coverage Coordinator, through Advocates Rajesh G. Inamdar and Shashwat Anand.

The plea has been filed on behalf of named leaders and other identified and unidentified persons allegedly detained or restrained in connection with the protest.

The plea invokes the Supreme Court's habeas corpus jurisdiction to secure judicial scrutiny of the reported detentions and the immediate release of persons whose custody is found to be unauthorised by law.

In a further development, Advocate-on-Record Rajesh G. Inamdar has approached the Supreme Court Registry seeking the urgent listing of the petition, Diary No. 63926/2026 preferably alongside another habeas corpus matter, Diary No. 63858/2026, which is listed for Sunday, October 11, 2026 before a Bench comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana.

The present petition was filed on the evening of October 10 after the persons reportedly detained in connection with the protest had not been released. He stated that the petitioners had initially expected the detainees to be released by the evening but were constrained to approach the Supreme Court when that did not happen.

The plea follows reports that Dipke, Das and Ranka were intercepted and taken into custody at the Indira Gandhi International Airport shortly after their flight landed in Delhi, allegedly before they could reach the proposed protest venue at Jantar Mantar. Reports have also referred to the detention or restraint of other CJP members, activists and persons intending to participate in the demonstration, including in locations outside the national capital.

The petition seeks directions requiring the authorities to disclose the identities of all persons detained, the circumstances and legal basis of each detention, the authorities responsible, the grounds communicated to the persons concerned and their present whereabouts. It also seeks production of relevant arrest records, police station diaries and movement registers.

A central contention raised in the plea is that the refusal of permission for a demonstration cannot, by itself, justify the indiscriminate detention of organisers, advocates, supporters or prospective participants. The petition maintains that regulation of a public assembly must be distinguished from deprivation of personal liberty, which must independently satisfy the requirements of law and the Constitution.

Invoking Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of the Constitution, the petition raises concerns regarding equality before the law, freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, personal liberty and safeguards against arrest and detention. It also relies on Supreme Court decisions including D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar, Himat Lal K. Shah v. Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, and In Re: Ramlila Maidan Incident.

The plea further seeks preservation of relevant CCTV footage from the airport, police stations, lock-ups and other locations, along with police control-room logs and movement records, to establish the circumstances in which the individuals were allegedly intercepted, detained or moved.

Gaurav Bharti has approached the Court in his capacity as CJP Coverage Coordinator amid reports that several members of the party's leadership have been detained and effective communication with them could not be established to ascertain their precise whereabouts, thus requiring access to the constitutional remedy of habeas corpus.

The Union of India, the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, senior Delhi Police authorities and the States of Haryana, Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh have been arrayed as respondents, in view of the reported detentions and restraints across different jurisdictions.

The petition clarifies that it does not seek immunity from lawful action in respect of any distinct offence supported by specific material. It seeks immediate judicial scrutiny of the reported restraints, disclosure of the legal basis of any continuing custody and the release of persons whose detention is found to be unlawful.