Saurav Das, chief spokesperson of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), is demanding the formal quashing of FIRs registered against students and protesters [1, 2].
The dispute centers on the legal status of those involved in recent unrest. The CJP argues that mere closure of cases is insufficient and that the government must provide a written guarantee to fully withdraw the charges to ensure the protesters are not targeted in the future [2, 3].
Das said the government had previously invited him to meet and presented a Supreme Court order [3]. However, he said that no written guarantee to drop the FIRs has been provided yet [3]. This lack of formal documentation has led the party to accuse the administration of using delay tactics to avoid a final resolution [1].
According to the CJP, the agitation lasted for 36 days [4]. The party maintains that the government is attempting to settle the matter through administrative closures rather than legal withdrawals. Das said, "We want withdrawal of FIRs, not just closure" [2].
The CJP has warned that fresh protests will be organized if the government does not honor the demand for formal quashing. Das said, "Don't use delay tactics" [1].
The tension in Delhi remains high as student groups await a definitive response from the government regarding the legal standing of the arrested individuals [1, 2].
“"Don't use delay tactics"”
The distinction between closing a case and withdrawing an FIR is a critical legal nuance in India. A closed case may be reopened or used as a record of criminal history, whereas a quashed or withdrawn FIR removes the legal cloud from the individual entirely. By demanding a written guarantee, the CJP is attempting to prevent the government from using the threat of future prosecution as a tool for political leverage over student activists.
