Told that CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka were 27 and 31, Justice Subramonium Prasad said “Then you are not Gen Z”, remarking that a protest which began with students had changed its cause while the people stayed the same.
New Delhi: It was a question about age that drew the Delhi High Court’s remark on Wednesday, October 21, in the plea of Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka against their judicial custody: once told that the two were 27 and 31, the Court said they were “not Gen Z”, adding that a protest that began with students had changed its cause while the people remained the same [Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka v. State (NCT of Delhi)].
Justice Subramonium Prasad made the remarks. Advocate Abhik Chimni appeared for Das and Ranka, and Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, with CGSC Ashish Dixit, for the Delhi Police. The petition was later withdrawn, with the Court recording that it had expressed no opinion on the merits.
Ages, and a remark on the movement
Chimni was arguing that the Special Executive Magistrate had moved on to examining the sureties and recorded a finding under Section 140 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) when the judge asked the petitioners’ ages. On being told they were 27 and 31, he said:
“Then you are not Gen Z. What age group are millennials? It began as a student protest, with children participating. Now the cause has changed, though the people remain the same.”
The judge went on:
“Who are you? What is your association, and what is its purpose? When there is an apprehension of breach of peace and tranquillity, these questions become important.”
Relevance, in the judge’s words
Questions about a group whose causes keep changing “may become relevant” when a Magistrate looks into an apprehension of breach of the peace, Justice Prasad explained. That debate, he said, should be left for the appropriate proceedings, because what was before him was the insistence on a bond.
Earlier in the hearing, he had said that the petitioners were “at the forefront”, and that if they broke a barricade, “there is a strong possibility that 10–20 others will follow”, while making clear he was “not saying whether it is good or bad.”
For the petitioners, Chimni maintained that the October 19 order disclosed no imminent threat, that there was no habitual conduct and that the sureties had been rejected arbitrarily. The Court indicated that the remedy lay in revision, and the petition was withdrawn.
How the case came to the High Court
Das and Ranka were first held on October 10, ahead of the CJP protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, and were released on peace bonds. After the October 13 protest at Jantar Mantar, which had been de-notified as a protest site, a Special Executive Magistrate sent them to judicial custody on October 14 for allegedly breaching those bonds. On October 19, Special Executive Magistrate Ritu Raj extended the custody until October 21 and held the sureties offered to be unfit. Their High Court petition, filed on October 20, challenged that order.
The police allegation that the two breached their bonds is untested, and the High Court recorded that it expressed no opinion on the merits. Das and Ranka are presumed innocent.
Case Title: Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka v. State (NCT of Delhi) (case number not available)
Bench: Justice Subramonium Prasad
Date: October 21, 2026 (petition dismissed as withdrawn)
Appearances: Advocate Abhik Chimni for the petitioners; ASG Chetan Sharma with CGSC Ashish Dixit for the Delhi Police