New Delhi, July 24: A group of advocates from across the country has written to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, urging the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the July 21 sit-in protest led by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi and other Opposition leaders near Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s official residence at 7, Lok Kalyan Marg.

The representation, signed by advocates from multiple High Courts and coordinated by advocate Sanket Gupta, urged the apex court to order a fact-finding inquiry into the protest and lay down binding guidelines governing demonstrations in the vicinity of high-security installations.

The advocates contended that the protest, held outside the Prime Minister’s residence, raised issues extending beyond ordinary public assembly and touched upon concerns of national security and constitutional governance.

According to the representation, Rahul Gandhi, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, other MPs, and the Chief Ministers of Kerala and Karnataka held a sit-in protest in the immediate vicinity of the Prime Minister’s residence without prior information or permission.

The representation said the area was “among the most security-sensitive locations in the National Capital” and that any unregulated gathering there carried security implications beyond those ordinarily associated with public protests.

It alleged that senior police officers repeatedly requested the protesters to disperse, informing them that the site was a high-security zone, but the assembly continued despite those appeals.

The advocates further claimed that Union Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office Jitendra Singh personally met Rahul Gandhi and urged him to end the protest after assuring that the government was willing to discuss the issue in Parliament, but the demonstration continued for several hours.

Referring to Rahul Gandhi’s social media post calling upon citizens to join the dharna, the representation alleged that inviting members of the public to gather near the Prime Minister’s residence carried “serious and foreseeable security implications” because of the unpredictable size and composition of any responding crowd.

According to the advocates, the Delhi Police eventually removed Rahul Gandhi and other MPs from the site after nearly three hours. “It is a matter of grave concern that a Constitutional functionary such as the Leader of Opposition himself placed the police in a position where such physical removal became necessary,” the representation stated, adding that any untoward incident during the standoff could have had “severe” consequences given the sensitivity of the location.

The advocates stressed that while the right to protest is constitutionally protected, it remains subject to reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order and national security.

“It is submitted that Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, but this right is expressly subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(3) in the interests of public order and the sovereignty and integrity of India,” the representation said.

The representation also argued that permitting such protests at high-security installations without scrutiny could set an undesirable precedent. “It is submitted that if this becomes a regular practice, it would pose a serious and continuing threat to the internal security architecture of the country,” it said.

“The Constitution makes no distinction between the ordinary citizen and the highest office-holder — all are equally bound by law, and the right to protest guaranteed by the Constitution is, and must remain, subject to reasonable limitations, including the requirement of prior permission in sensitive areas,” the representation added.

Seeking judicial intervention, the advocates urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the incident, direct an appropriate fact-finding inquiry, and frame uniform, prospective guidelines regulating protests in the immediate vicinity of high-security installations.

They said such guidelines should apply equally to all political parties and formations and balance the constitutional right to protest with legitimate security imperatives.

Mumbai, July 24: Facing existential threats due to the high-profile defections by six Lok Sabha MPs who joined the Eknath Shinde faction, the Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray is deploying a three-pronged approach to save the party, i.e. ideological reclaiming, issue-based youth mobilisation, and constitutional litigation.

Rather than playing defence after losing key party members, the Sena (UBT) is attempting to shift the political momentum back onto the ruling BJP-led Mahayuti/NDA coalition.

Thackeray has raised the issue of financial irregularities in the Shri Ram Temple donations by launching a statewide “Ram Raksha” campaign and a “BJP-free Ram movement.”

This is important as Hindutva has traditionally been the BJP’s sole ideological moat. By questioning the financial integrity of the Ram Temple movement and demanding accountability for donations (especially the silver bricks), Thackeray has targeted the BJP’s core voter base.

It forced the BJP onto the defensive on its home turf. Challenging the BJP in its ideological citadel of Nagpur, is designed to signal to traditional Sena voters that the UBT faction has not abandoned its core ideological roots despite political realignments.

Visiting Jantar Mantar, condemning the police lathi-charge on NEET paper leak protesters, comparing the government to Colonial rulers, and setting up free legal aid cells, Thackeray for a while has changed track beyond the Shiv Sena (UBT)’s traditional hyper-ethno-nationalist and religious appeal to retain relevance among younger, urban, and middle-class voters.

Joining student protests Uddhav Thackeray highlighted governance failures in education, exam integrity and state heavy-handedness. The comparison to Colonial rule and past democratic precedents like Indira Gandhi and Manmohan Singh, aimed to frame the ruling alliance as autocratic, thus appealing to neutral and youth voters affected by systemic administrative failures.

While the SC declined an interim stay on July 22, 2026, obtaining show-cause notices against the Speaker, Secretariat, and rebel MPs keeps a legal sword hanging over the Shinde faction. Legally, it tests the boundaries of the anti-defection law regarding split vs merger provisions when an original party maintains its independent legal identity.

Politically, it framed the rebel MPs as opportunists who betrayed the public mandate under which they were elected. Historically, the split between Uddhav and Raj Thackeray fragmented the traditional Sena voter base in the Mumbai-Thane-Konkan belt.

Re-aligning with Raj Thackeray creates a formidable regional bloc. It consolidates the Marathi vote in upcoming civic body (BMC) and state-level contests, presenting a unified front that is difficult for national parties to divide.

While Thackeray’s aggressive posture has created immediate momentum, several vulnerabilities remain. The ongoing defection of elected MPs/MLAs undermines organisational stability at the constituency level, even if public sympathy favours the UBT faction.

Political observers said that balancing hardline Hindutva messaging through Ram Temple campaigns with broader social/youth issues and coalition politics requires careful calibration to avoid alienating either traditional nationalists or secular alliance partners.

Constitutional litigations in the Supreme Court often stretch over long periods. Without immediate legal stays, the political reality on the ground (recognised mergers) can become difficult to reverse practically before major election cycles.

However, Thackeray through his recent actions signals that his party is refusing to be sidelined into regional irrelevance. By combining ideological counter-attacks, constitutional challenges, youth mobilisation, and tactical regional unity, he is attempting to frame the broader conflict as a fight for democratic accountability and local identity against centralised power.

New Delhi, July 24: After the University of Delhi (DU), Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has also issued an advisory asking students and other stakeholders to refrain from visiting Jantar Mantar, where the Cockroach Janta Party is holding a protest over the NEET paper leak and other issues.

In an advisory issued on Friday, the university urged members of its academic community to act responsibly and prioritise their personal safety.

“All stakeholders of JNU’s epistemic community are advised to act responsibly and prioritise their personal safety. In accordance with the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India’s directions on public demonstrations, you are requested to refrain from participating in or visiting gatherings at or around Jantar Mantar, New Delhi,” the advisory stated.

The university also cautioned students about their conduct on social media, warning that violations could attract legal and disciplinary action.

“Please exercise responsibility on social media. Violations may invite legal consequences under applicable laws as well as disciplinary action under the University’s code of conduct,” the statement said.

It further urged students and staff to uphold the principles of responsible citizenship, saying, “You are also encouraged to uphold the values of academic responsibility and responsible citizenship.”

The advisory came a day after Delhi University issued a similar appeal to its students and faculty members, urging them to stay away from demonstrations at Jantar Mantar due to potential safety and legal consequences.

In its statement on Thursday, DU said that the safety and well-being of students remained its foremost priority and warned against participation in unlawful assemblies or demonstrations.

“Dear students and faculty, your safety matters to us,” the advisory said, adding that gatherings at Jantar Mantar are subject to regulations and restrictions laid down under directions of the Supreme Court of India.

The advisories from the two central universities came amid continued protests at Jantar Mantar over the demand for the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan despite activist Sonam Wangchuk ending his 26-day fast.