A Capital Beat discussion featuring Sujata Paul, Congress spokesperson, Prof. Tanvir Aeijaz of Ramjas College, and The Federal‘s Abhishek Rawat examined the protest led by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) at Jantar Mantar in Delhi over alleged examination irregularities and demands for accountability in the education system.
The protest was led by CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke and was later joined by activist Sonam Wangchuk. The central demand raised during the demonstration was the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over issues linked to the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak controversy and concerns regarding CBSE’s on-screen marking system.
Also read: Cockroach party protest: What are CJP supporters’ demands and what Dipke said
The discussion also focused on the scale of the protest, questions surrounding its future direction, and the broader sentiment among students affected by examination-related controversies.
Protest ends before permitted time
Rawat reported that the protest concluded around 3:30 pm, despite permission from Delhi Police extending until 5 pm.
He noted that Dipke and Wangchuk addressed supporters before leaving the venue and conveyed their demand to the government. According to Rawat, the organisers indicated that future steps would be decided after internal discussions.
“Dharmendra Pradhan should give his resignation and he should own the responsibility of exam paper leaks and the students who died by suicide due to this system failure,” Rawat quoted the organisers as saying during the protest.
The discussion highlighted that no immediate announcement was made regarding a continuation of the protest on the following day. Instead, organisers indicated that they would evaluate the response from the government before announcing future plans.
Rawat stated that both the government and the organisers appeared to be assessing the scale and impact of the mobilisation before deciding on subsequent actions.
Questions over turnout
The panel examined the turnout at the protest and whether online popularity translated into physical participation.
Rawat estimated that around 2,000 to 2,500 people were present at the peak of the gathering, including members of the media and social media creators.
“Till then, the number of protesters was increased by about 2,000 protesters,” Rawat said while describing the developments after Dipke and Wangchuk arrived at the venue.
The discussion noted that the protest had generated significant attention on social media, with references made to the movement’s large online following. However, the panel also observed that the turnout on the ground was considerably lower than the numbers associated with the movement online.
Rawat described the protest as largely unorganised, with participants arriving independently after learning about the event through social media platforms.
Student anger and examination concerns
Paul argued that the core issue driving the movement was student frustration over examination-related controversies and concerns about educational accountability.
“There are two issues over here. One is what has stirred this entire meme to movement. And that is basically the angst of the students, the young minds, their parents, teachers as well,” Paul said.
Paul stated that questions surrounding the NEET examination process and the CBSE evaluation system had created widespread concern among students and parents.
“It’s not as if the Congress party has not been raising questions on the NEET leak from 2024, when the leak happened at that time, to now. We are raising questions, and we are demanding Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation,” she said.
Discussing the CBSE on-screen marking system, Paul expressed concern about the evaluation process and referred to her experience as a teacher while speaking about assessment practices and student welfare.
The panel repeatedly returned to the issue of student aspirations and the impact that examination controversies could have on young people preparing for higher education and careers.
Congress view on movement
Paul stated that the Congress had not opposed the movement and maintained that students had the right to question institutions and seek accountability.
“When students are questioning the system, let’s give them some respect,” she said.
She also referred to previous student-led mobilisations in India and argued that public participation often emerges from issues that directly affect young people.
Paul maintained that Congress leaders had consistently raised questions regarding examination irregularities and supported demands for accountability.
“The Congress party has never done that kind of thing, and today also a number of our people are there with the CJP movement also,” she said.
At the same time, she acknowledged discussions within political circles regarding the nature and leadership of the movement, while insisting that student concerns should remain the primary focus.
Debate over political significance
Prof. Aeijaz described the protest as reflecting a broader mood among students affected by alleged failures in the education system.
“There is definitely a collective anger in students,” Aeijaz said.
He argued that examination controversies had created concerns about careers, opportunities and future prospects, resulting in growing frustration among young people.
“Their demand is very clear, clean and simple. Just one demand at the moment is to remove the education minister,” he said.
Aeijaz suggested that the movement was still evolving and searching for an organisational structure capable of sustaining public mobilisation.
“They are looking for some kind of organisation. They are looking for some kind of how they can become a more meaningful structurally proper organisation in terms of their protest against the government,” he said.
The discussion also examined whether opposition groups and student organisations could find common ground around issues related to educational accountability and governance.
Future direction remains uncertain
Rawat indicated that organisers had not finalised the next phase of the campaign and were expected to review the outcome of the Jantar Mantar protest before announcing future plans.
“They declared from the stage that if Dharmendra Pradhan does not resign, then this protest will go on and continue,” Rawat said.
He added that the organisers had not yet presented a structured roadmap and were still discussing how to proceed.
“There is a certain kind of confusion between them,” Rawat observed while describing the organisational state of the protest.
Aeijaz, however, argued that the issue was unlikely to disappear quickly because it was rooted in concerns shared by students across different regions.
“It’s already a pan-India movement, and the only thing is how they are going to organise their next move,” he said.
The panel discussion concluded with agreement that the coming days would determine whether the protest develops into a larger mobilisation or remains centred on its immediate demand regarding the education minister and examination-related accountability.
(The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.)
Comments are closed.