Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke claimed on September 27 that Mumbai Police denied permission for a protest scheduled for October 2 at Shivaji Park, according to reports in The Times of India and Indian Express. Dipke stated the police cited a 2013 Bombay High Court order restricting the use of Shivaji Park for purposes other than sports, and noted the organizers had not submitted required BMC permission for the ground. The police also mentioned concerns about noise pollution and traffic congestion in the area, which could affect access to hospitals.

Dipke, in a post on X, said the denial of permission was an attempt to suppress citizens’ voices and announced that the CJP would launch a 'Jail Bharo Andolan' in Mumbai on Gandhi Jayanti if their right to protest was denied. The proposed protest was part of a nationwide call for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, following allegations of dissent within the Election Commission. The CJP had previously demanded Kumar's resignation by September 26, with the protest planned to begin on October 2.

The CJP's claims of denied permission are part of a broader conflict with authorities, including allegations that its co-convenor Ashutosh Ranka and volunteers were detained in Assam without being informed of the reasons. Ranka, in a video posted on X, alleged that Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma ordered the detention to prevent the CJP from highlighting issues such as school conditions and evictions in Kaziranga. NCP (SP) spokesperson Anish Gawande supported these allegations, calling the detention 'illegally and unconstitutionally' carried out and accusing the government of creating a 'police state' to intimidate civil society.

The Election Commission has rejected claims of dissent within its ranks, reasserting that key decisions, including the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of voter rolls, were taken unanimously. The commission emphasized that differing views are part of institutional deliberations and that its orders have legal sanction. However, Dipke and the CJP continue to push for a nationwide protest, with Dipke urging citizens to pledge to save democracy on Gandhi Jayanti.

The situation remains unclear on several fronts. While the police have denied permission for the protest, the exact nature of the CJP's planned 'Jail Bharo Andolan' is not specified. Additionally, the allegations of illegal detention in Assam have not been independently verified, and the Election Commission has not provided a detailed response to the claims of dissent. The CJP's call for a nationwide protest also lacks specific details on its planned activities or expected outcomes. These gaps in information highlight the need for further verification and context before drawing definitive conclusions about the events and their implications.

The CJP's actions and the responses from authorities reflect a growing tension between civil society and government institutions in India. The party's claims of suppression and the police's denial of permission underscore the challenges faced by groups seeking to raise public issues through protest. The involvement of the NCP (SP) in supporting the CJP's allegations adds another layer to the political dynamics at play. As the situation unfolds, the focus will remain on the legal and procedural aspects of the protest, as well as the broader implications for freedom of expression and civic engagement in the country.