The Delhi Police has assured the Delhi High Court that law enforcement authorities have already initiated requisite measures to regulate and restrain the activities of Abhijeet Dipke and his associates to safeguard public order and commercial activity in Central Delhi. 

The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by a licensed street vendor against the public call given on social media to gather at Central Park, Connaught Place, directly above Palika Bazar, at 5 PM on October 16 2026, by Abhijeet Dipke.

Senior Advocates Sanjay Poddar and Sacchin Puri appeared for the Petitioner, while ASGI Chetan Sharma and CGSC Jivesh Tiwari appeared for the Union.

The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma inquired into the maintainability of the grievance and questioned the basis of the petitioner's apprehension regarding inaction by the authorities.

In response, the Respondents assured the Court that all necessary legal measures had already been initiated to control and regulate the activities of respondent no. 6 (Abhijeet Dipke) and his associates, and that the concerns raised by the traders would be duly addressed.

The Bench ordered, "When confronted, the Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Respondents No. 1 to 3 in W.P.(C) 15500/2026 assures that the apprehension of the petitioner shall be taken care of, as the respondents have taken enough steps in the matter to regulate and control the activity of Respondent No. 6 in W.P.(C) 15500/2026. The assurance is taken on record."

The Respondent No. 6 in the case is the Cockroach Janta Party through its founder Abhijeet Dipke. 


The plea was filed on behalf of the street vendors, daily wage earners and other small traders who earn their livelihood in and around Jantar Mantar and the adjoining areas of Central Delhi, and whose small businesses have been severely hampered and affected by the regular protests and agitations in and around the Jantar Mantar area.

The plea sought the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or a writ of similar nature directing the Respondents to enforce strictly, in letter and in spirit, the law declared by the Supreme Court in Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India (2018), which has twice held that protests in Delhi must be confined to designated places and must not block public roads, and the order by which the Delhi Police have now de-notified Jantar Mantar as a site for protests.

"For years the limits on protests at Jantar Mantar were not enforced, and the roads of Central Delhi were repeatedly shut down, the loss falling on vendors and daily earners who had no part in those agitations. The Petitioner asks only that the law already declared, and the order already made, be enforced on the ground", the plea stated.

It was submitted that the trade of street vendors depends on the free movement of people and goods to and through Central Delhi. Whenever a large agitation is held at Jantar Mantar, the roads around it are barricaded, traffic is diverted, and people stop coming; on such days street vendors sell little or nothing, and when the agitation runs for weeks, they lose weeks of income. 

The petition said that these issues are of grave public importance concerning the right to carry on any occupation, trade or business as enshrined in Article 19(1)(g) and the right to life and livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

"That for the purposes of the present Petition, “the Jantar Mantar Area” means Jantar Mantar and the area around it, in particular the area in Central Delhi comprising Jantar Mantar Road, Parliament Street, Connaught Place and the roads adjoining them. Jantar Mantar having been de-notified (de-listed) as a protest site by the order dated 11.10.2026, the whole of this area now stands on the same footing as any other public way in the city: it is not a place where any protest, dharna or gathering may be held, and its roads and footpaths must be kept open for public use", it added.

It also referred to the earlier protests held in July, 2026, with regard to the NEET Paper leak, and said that a large agitation spilt beyond the designated area. The roads around Jantar Mantar and Parliament Street were barricaded and came to a standstill. Customers stopped coming to Connaught Place and Palika Bazar, and the Petitioner could not vend, which caused loss on a daily basis.

"That the de-notification, by itself, does not help the Petitioner unless it is enforced. The order was issued amid heightened security arrangements, calls to protest at Jantar Mantar continue, and traffic diversions remain in force at several junctions. If barricades and diversions stay on indefinitely, the area will remain cut off and the vendors will lose their earnings all the same, this time to security measures rather than to agitations", it averred.

The Plea prayed for directions to the Respondents to strictly enforce the law laid down in Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan v. Union of India, (2018) and Amit Sahni (Shaheen Bagh, In re) v. Commissioner of Police, (2020), and the Delhi Police order de-notifying Jantar Mantar as a site for protests.

It was also prayed that no protest, dharna or gathering should be permitted at Jantar Mantar or on the roads and footpaths around it, in particular in the area of Central Delhi, including the agitation announced for 16.10.2026 at Central Park, Connaught Place, and that any such gathering is removed at once.

"Issue necessary directions to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to prepare and implement a traffic and pedestrian access plan for Jantar Mantar and Parliament Street and the adjoining roads of Central Delhi, with advance public notice of any restrictions, and to ensure that barricades and traffic diversions in the area are limited to what is strictly necessary and are removed once the need ends", the petitioner prayed.

The Supreme Court has also issued notice in a writ petition seeking quashing and setting aside of the Standing Order dated October 11, 2026, issued by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, whereby Jantar Mantar has been de-notified as a designated venue for peaceful protests and demonstrations.

Appearance:

Petitioners: Senior Advocates Sacchin Puri, Sanjay Podar, Advocates Harsh Ahuja, Harsh Vardhan, Abhishek Singh, Swastik Bhuchar, Abhishek Gupta, Surender Sinha, Ashna Bhola, Shubhnavi Shivhare, Mehak Ghaloth, Sunil Kumar, Dhan Singh, Puneet Sharma, Sanjay Bobby Sharma, Krisha Shukal and Ayushi Chugh

Respondents:  Chetan Sharma ASG, Advocates Amit Tiwari, Ashish Dixit, Jivesh Tiwari, Apoorv Shukla, Amit Gupta, Shubham Sharma, Umar Hashmi, Naman, Jivesh Kumar Tiwari, Ritu Bhardwaj GP, Nandini Aggarwal, Ashish K Dixit, Apoorv Shukla, Umar Hashmi, Amit Gupta, Naman, Shubham Sharma, Akshay Chopra, Amit Acharya, Kalyan Babu Singh, Devendra Kumar, Kamaldeep and Rahul Kumar Sharma

Cause Title: Sh Anil Kumar Gupta v. Union of India & Ors. 

Click here to read/download Order



Tags: