The Delhi High Court on Friday addressed a petition submitted by Abhijeet Dipke, founder of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), challenging the suspension of their X account. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav refrained from ordering the immediate reinstatement of the account, emphasizing the necessity of hearing from the Union government due to the substantial implications of the case.
During the proceedings, Justice Kaurav remarked, “There may be some substance in your submissions, but they all need to be considered. They will be considered holistically after hearing the other side. There are far-reaching issues. There are wider ramifications.” The court indicated its intention to explore whether X can be mandated to disclose the blocking order following the Union of India’s comprehensive response.
The court has scheduled a hearing for July 6 and instructed the government to submit its response within four weeks. Additionally, the court ordered the review of the blocking order by a committee mandated to meet bi-monthly as per the rules. This committee, empowered to assess all facets of the blocking order, was directed to record its decisions.
Given that Dipke resides in Boston, USA, the court allowed the possibility of him appearing before the review committee via video conferencing. Dipke’s legal challenge, presented through Advocate Nakul Gandhi, contests the government’s blocking decision, which cited national security concerns based on inputs from the Intelligence Bureau (IB). The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) had directed X to withhold the account under Section 69(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The Cockroach Janta Party, a satirical online movement, rapidly gained popularity across social media platforms, notably among younger users. This movement emerged following Supreme Court proceedings on May 15, where Chief Justice of India Surya Kant made remarks comparing unemployed young lawyers on social media to “cockroaches.” The CJI later clarified that his comments were aimed at individuals with fake qualifications, not unemployed youth in general.
More Read
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal argued for the reinstatement of the CJP’s account pending the resolution of the case, suggesting that some tweets could remain blocked instead. The court, however, insisted on issuing notices before considering such orders. The bench highlighted the ambiguity surrounding the reasons for the account’s suspension, noting the absence of a clear blocking order from X.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, expressed concerns about the intermediary’s role, suggesting it appeared to support the petitioner. The court assured that it would hear the government’s arguments before issuing any orders. Alongside Senior Advocate Sibal, several other advocates represented Dipke, while the government was represented by SG Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, among others.
