Cockroach Janta Party: Hijacked? Haryana Lawyer vs Abhijeet Dipke, EC Entry Sparks Drama

A 35-year-old Haryana lawyer has approached the Election Commission of India seeking registration of the satirical digital movement Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) as a political party and has also proposed himself as its national convener, triggering a dispute over control of the viral online platform.

Advocate Sudhir Jakhar said he filed the application after the movement gained massive online traction, arguing it reflected strong public sentiment and deserved formal political recognition. He added that since Abhijeet Dipke , the founder of the movement, is currently in the United States for higher studies, he decided to take the initiative forward.

Jakhar said he had earlier been active in student politics and participated in the farmers’ protests against the three farm laws , during which he also faced legal cases.

The application was submitted on May 22 under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 , which governs the registration of political parties. It describes the proposed outfit as a people-centric platform focused on constitutional awareness, transparency in governance, environmental protection, animal welfare, social accountability, and promotion of Fundamental Duties under Article 51-A of the Constitution of India , while also pledging commitment to rule of law, ethical governance, communal harmony, and democratic participation .

The Cockroach Janta Party was launched on May 16 by Dipke, a communications professional and former Aam Aadmi Party digital volunteer (2020–2023). It emerged as a satirical response to controversial remarks attributed to Chief Justice of India Surya Kant during a May 15 hearing, later clarified as being misquoted, and rapidly went viral across social media platforms.

The movement reportedly amassed millions of followers within days, positioning itself around issues such as unemployment, exam irregularities, inflation, and governance concerns affecting youth.

However, its online presence soon faced multiple setbacks, including the withholding of its X (formerly Twitter) account in India and reported takedown or disruption of its website , amid legal and regulatory actions. These restrictions triggered debate over free speech and satire online.

Dipke has also claimed he received threats following the platform’s rapid rise and has moved legal proceedings challenging the blocking, citing violation of free expression, while authorities have invoked Section 69A of the IT Act citing national security concerns.

The lawyer’s move has now intensified questions over ownership and control of the movement as it moves closer to possible political recognition.