CJP Leaders Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka Move Delhi High Court Against Extension Of Judicial Custody

Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka have approached the Delhi High Court challenging an order extending their judicial custody by two days. The order was passed by a Special Executive Magistrate on October 19.

The two leaders have sought an urgent hearing in the matter. The case relates to their alleged violation of peace bonds signed earlier, following an attempt to unfurl the national flag at Jantar Mantar despite prohibitory orders, Live Law reports.

What Led To Their Arrest?

Das and Ranka were first apprehended at an airport on October 10, ahead of protests announced in Delhi against the Chief Election Commissioner. They faced preventive proceedings under Sections 126 and 170 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

They were released the same day after being required to furnish peace bonds of ₹50,000. However, they were apprehended again on October 14 after attempting to stage a Tiranga protest at Jantar Mantar. Executive Magistrate Mahesh Kumar Meena subsequently remanded them to five days of judicial custody.

Why Have The Leaders Challenged The Order?

The matter came up for further proceedings on October 19, when Special Executive Magistrate Ritu Raj extended their judicial custody by another two days.

In their petition, Das and Ranka have argued that the magistrate “arbitrarily exercised” powers under Section 135(3) of the BNSS. They have challenged the decision to extend their custody on the ground that they had failed to execute the required bonds.

According to the petition, the sureties produced before the magistrate on October 19 met the legal requirements. The leaders have also disputed the finding that no other surety was present, claiming that two additional sureties were available.

The petition further states that two more sureties had duly executed bonds and fixed deposit receipts (FDRs), but the leaders were not given an opportunity to present them before the magistrate.

Protest Or Threat To Public Order?

The petition questions the basis of the magistrate’s findings, claiming that they were drawn entirely from the investigating officer’s application.

The leaders have argued that holding a protest at a de-notified site is a matter of regulation rather than a threat to public order. Their challenge raises questions about whether the circumstances justified extending their judicial custody.

What Did The Magistrate Say?

In the October 19 order, Special Executive Magistrate Ritu Raj observed that Das and Ranka had deliberately violated their peace bonds and immediately committed a breach of peace.

The magistrate also referred to concerns raised by the investigating officer about the leaders’ alleged habitual conduct of calling protests in de-notified areas.

The order stated that the leaders’ assurance that they would not repeat the alleged conduct did not inspire confidence, considering the material submitted by the police.

Why Were The Sureties Rejected?

The magistrate directed the leaders to furnish fresh sureties after finding that those produced before the court were unfit to act as sureties.

According to the order, there were discrepancies between the photographs attached to the bond documents and those on the sureties’ Aadhaar cards. The sureties were also unable to provide satisfactory answers during the inquiry.

The dispute over the sureties is central to the leaders’ challenge before the Delhi High Court. While the magistrate found them unsuitable, Das and Ranka maintain that they had met the legal requirements and were denied an opportunity to present additional sureties.

The Delhi High Court has now been approached to examine the challenge to the extension of their judicial custody.