Supreme Court declines urgent hearing on plea seeking probe into Cockroach Janta Party

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to grant an urgent hearing on a plea seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the activities of individuals linked to the online satirical movement known as the “Cockroach Janta Party,” which emerged following recent remarks made by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant during court proceedings. A Bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and VM Pancholi observed that there was no immediate urgency in the matter after Advocate NK Goswami, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the movement was tarnishing the image of the judiciary. “Don’t take it so sentimentally,” the Bench remarked during the brief exchange.

Another counsel informed the court that the petition also sought an investigation into alleged fake law degrees and fraudulent legal qualifications linked to certain individuals associated with the movement. The lawyer further contended that oral courtroom exchanges should not be commercially exploited through social media content and online campaigns. Responding to the submissions, the CJI said, “There is no such grave urgency. We will see.” The plea, filed by Advocate Raja Choudhary, seeks a CBI probe into what it describes as the organised misuse and monetisation of courtroom observations made during recent Supreme Court hearings. The petition alleges that certain oral remarks of the court were selectively clipped, turned into memes and circulated widely on digital platforms without context.

The “Cockroach Janta Party” gained traction online earlier this month after remarks made by the Bench headed by CJI Surya Kant during a hearing on May 15. While discussing concerns over fake degrees and professional misconduct, the CJI had observed that some unemployed young lawyers were drifting away from legal practice towards social media activity and RTI activism.

“There are youngsters like cockroaches who are not getting employment in the profession. Some are on social media, some become RTI activists,” the CJI had remarked during the hearing. The comments triggered criticism online and led to the emergence of the satirical movement, particularly among younger social media users. The collective has since expanded into a wider online campaign addressing issues such as unemployment, institutional accountability and media freedom through political satire.

According to reports, the initiative was started by Abhijeet Dipke, a Boston-based Indian resident. Since then, the campaign has gained significant visibility across Instagram and other platforms, with meme pages, online petitions and merchandise linked to the movement. The petition before the Supreme Court clarified that it was not aimed at curbing free speech, criticism of the judiciary or democratic dissent protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Instead, it alleged “commercial exploitation” and “algorithmically amplified digital commodification” of oral courtroom proceedings through viral content and monetised online campaigns. The matter is expected to be taken up by the court at a later stage.