Abhijit Dipke, founder of the controversial online movement “Cockroach Janata Party”, has approached the Delhi High Court challenging the blocking of the party’s X (formerly Twitter) account. 

The plea comes amid an ongoing debate over online satire, freedom of expression, and the fallout from recent remarks made by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant during court proceedings.

The “Cockroach Janata Party” emerged as a satirical social media campaign after oral observations made by the Chief Justice during a hearing drew widespread attention online. During the proceedings, the CJI had reportedly remarked that certain unemployed youth attacking institutions under the guise of online activism were behaving like “cockroaches.”

The statement triggered intense reactions on social media, leading to the creation of the parody movement, which rapidly gained traction and reportedly amassed millions of followers within just a few days.

However, the Chief Justice later issued a clarification stating that his remarks had been misconstrued. He explained that the comments were specifically directed at individuals entering the legal profession using fake or bogus degrees, and not at unemployed youth in general. Despite the clarification, the controversy continued to escalate online, with various social media campaigns and discussions centering around the issue.

Subsequently, the social media handles associated with the “Cockroach Janata Party” were suspended, prompting Dipke to move the High Court against the action. The petition is expected to raise questions regarding platform accountability, online satire, and the extent to which parody-based political expression can be restricted on social media platforms.

Meanwhile, the issue also reached the Supreme Court of India on Monday when Advocate N.K. Goswami orally mentioned a plea seeking urgent listing of a petition connected to the controversy. During the hearing, the advocate argued that despite the clarification issued by the Chief Justice, a “distorted and malicious narrative” was still being circulated.

Responding to the submissions, CJI Surya Kant reportedly advised the lawyer not to take the issue “so sentimentally.” The Court, however, did not agree to urgent listing of the matter.

In a related development, another petition was mentioned before the Supreme Court seeking directions to restrain the monetisation of oral courtroom remarks on digital platforms. The plea also sought a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into allegations concerning fake lawyers and bogus law degrees. This petition too was linked to the larger controversy surrounding the “Cockroach Janata Party” movement.

The Chief Justice declined urgent intervention in that matter as well, observing that there was no immediate urgency and that the case would be listed in due course as per the regular procedure of the Court.

The controversy has sparked wider discussions within legal and social media circles about the impact of viral online narratives, judicial remarks being taken out of context, and the growing intersection between digital satire and constitutional free speech protections.

Read More: These Provisions Of IBC (Amendment) Act, 2026 To Be Effective From 26 May 2026