The Delhi High Court on Wednesday remarked that Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were not Gen Z after being told they were 27 and 31 years old, respectively.
The exchange took place during a hearing on their plea challenging the extension of their judicial custody in connection with an alleged attempt to unfurl the national flag at Jantar Mantar in violation of prohibitory orders.
When advocate Abhik Chimni, appearing for the petitioners, told the court their ages, Justice Subramonium Prasad remarked, “Then you are not Gen Z. What is Gen Z?” Bar and Bench reported.
After being told that people born after 1997 are generally considered Gen Z, the judge reiterated, “Then you are not Gen Z.”
The hearing also examined whether the activists had approached the High Court through the appropriate legal route.
The petitioners had challenged an October 19 order by the Special Executive Magistrate (SEM) extending their judicial custody until October 21 in preventive proceedings under Sections 126 and 170 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
According to ANI, they sought the quashing of the order, their immediate release and a stay on the custody extension, arguing that their continued detention was illegal and violated their right to personal liberty.
However, Justice Prasad questioned whether they should first pursue an alternative remedy by filing a revision petition against the SEM's order.
“Your second incident. You are a person who has actually broken a bond. Your remedy actually lies in revision,” the judge observed, according to Bar and Bench.
The court also questioned the need to approach the High Court when the matter was scheduled to come up before the SEM later that day. Justice Prasad suggested that the petitioners consider withdrawing their plea, await the outcome of those proceedings and then assess their legal options.
The judge noted that the matter could not be finally decided at the hearing without seeking a response from the state government.
The court also examined whether authorities were justified in imposing stricter surety conditions after the activists allegedly breached their peace bonds for a second time.
“Once you have broken peace for the second time, are the authorities not entitled to insist upon everything?” the court asked, as reported by Bar and Bench.
ALSO READ | Delhi Court Orders CJP Leader Abhijeet Dipke's Release On Rs 50,000 Peace Bond
Justice Prasad further noted that the challenge to the denotification of Jantar Mantar as a designated protest venue was pending before the Supreme Court and that the notification had not been stayed.
Raising concerns about public order, the judge observed that breaching barricades could encourage others to violate prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS.
The court also referred to protests escalating into violence in other countries, emphasising the role of police permissions in preventing disruption and the entry of unwanted elements into demonstrations.
Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.