Jantar Mantar: A Protest of Gen-Z

Introduction

The youth-led protests in Nepal in 2025 showed how quickly a generation’s frustrations can shift from digital spaces to the streets, turning into a matter of political accountability. What started as concerns about corruption, nepotism, unemployment, and social media restrictions escalated into a national political crisis, highlighting both the democratic potential and unpredictability of digitally organised youth movements. In India, a different set of grievances brought young people to Jantar Mantar, where issues like examination integrity, institutional responsibility, and students’ futures sparked a larger conversation about the relationship between citizens and the state.

The movement gained symbolic significance after controversy over a comment by Chief Justice Surya Kant, which he later clarified referred to individuals with fake qualifications rather than Indian youth. What began as a protest about exams evolved into a series of events where language shaped identity, identity fuelled resistance, and resistance raised important questions about accountability, responsibility, dissent, and public order. This essay does not seek to judge the participants but aims to explore the various perceptions around the Jantar Mantar protest and what these events reveal about youth, institutions, democratic responsibility, and the state's connection with its citizens.

Jantar Mantar as a Protest Site

In the 1980s, Delhi’s Jantar Mantar emerged as a major protest site, and by the early 1990s, it became an established space for public demonstrations. Why did this scientific, historic, and civic landmark transform into a protest venue? The primary reason is its central location in the national capital, close to Parliament and key government offices, while not disrupting the city’s essential functions. Over time, the astronomical observatory evolved into a place where citizens, groups, and movements brought their concerns into the public eye.

Built entirely of stone and masonry, the observatory reflects an era before modern telescopes became common in India (Kawrani). Its unique architecture, featuring ramps, arcs, and circular structures, draws attention and holds symbolic meaning in its political role. The ramps symbolise the cosmic axis—the unmoving centre of the universe; the arcs represent human uncertainty, bound to the earth and unable to perceive full reality; and the circles evoke the cosmic egg, encouraging inward reflection and the lowering of ego to foster growth. The observatory’s symbolism—designed to observe beyond the skies and explore the universe—parallels its role as a site where people express their hope to watch and challenge the government system from the ground. This aligns with the spirit of the Indian Constitution’s opening words, “We, the People of India,” affirming that ultimate power resides with the citizens. Through their protests, people send a clear message: “We are watching the government, which has not responded to our concerns or fulfilled its responsibilities.”

Perceptions of the Protest

Every event or activity in our daily lives carries multiple perceptions, and together these provide a holistic understanding of what occurred. This research method allows us to explore all possible perspectives on the various incidents during the widespread protest. Through this, we gain insight into the responsibilities and accountability of both the protesters and the government. Additionally, it serves to raise awareness among the “people of India” about the vital importance of safeguarding the nation’s sovereignty from external and internal forces that threaten the integrity of our motherland.

·       A generational awakening (“Gen Z revolt”)

onmanorama.com

Through this essay, we're making points or views upon "Generation Z" or "Gen Z". This term refers to people born roughly between 1997 and 2012. Due to technological advancement, this generation got the opportunity to understand the issues which were present in society through the internet. This was the very reason for the protest to be perceived not merely as a policy dispute but as the emergence of a new political generation. Primarily this essay focuses upon the Jantar Mantar protest led by those who had grown tired of the continuous failure of the system."

Gen Zs are aware of V.S. Naipaul’s description of India, in India: A Million Mutinies Now as a "country of a million little mutinies" – a phrase that captures the recurring tension between institutions and citizens' grievances. While these discrepancies in the system have long been evident, earlier generations largely avoided confronting them directly. This generation refuses to stay silent and wants to change the system to respond to the concern for the system. The NEET exam raises serious concern over the accountability and the responsibility of the government to respond. It turned the frustration of the students into bringing transparency to the system. However, this protest was the product of online mockery, which led to the alleged comment about the younger generation by calling them "cockroaches".

·       The “Cockroach” Remark: Language, Perception and Youth

During a Supreme Court hearing on May 15, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked that unemployed young people who turn to media, social media, or RTI activism to challenge the system behave "like cockroaches" (Service). The statement, made in the context of a case concerning fraudulent professional qualifications, quickly spread online and triggered widespread backlash. Thereafter, Gen Z show their stand that yes! We’re cockroaches; we Gen Zs are being forced to be the parasites by the previous generation. Apparently, many content creators question why we’re like that and why all the older generation didn’t let the system correct it. Why are people of your generation never refining the education system, which will make us more productive? Why you all were unable to provide transparency in the system.

This perception was inherited by the youth, and later CJI Surya Kant clarified that by stating the bogus degree holder is the real headache of the system and society, which creates a lot of questions of integrity, on 16th May. During the hearing, CJI Surya Kant criticised the people who create a strong headache for the nation and system by attaining degrees by unlawful methods and coming into the legal profession with questionable or fake qualifications. Through this, the CJI stated something which is serious: how people are committing the crime by cheating the due process and creating a problem in society. These people’s modus operandi is always questionable, and honesty for society's interest can be compromised.

The original courtroom context was not a general discussion about India’s youth. It arose from a dispute concerning professional qualifications and alleged fake degrees. Yes, it is the context from the CJI’s bench during a confrontation of a matter concerning a lawyer’s attempt to attain the senior advocate designation. Further in the statement by the CJI, he stated that those people who attain the bogus degrees enter the profession. He said that similar people had entered the profession, like in media, social media and other professions as well. He also clarified by rejecting the claim that he was criticising the Indian youth generally and described Indian youth as important to India’s development.

·       Satire Turned into Resistance

Emergence of satire of the Cockroach Janta Party, which was started as an online mockery of the statement given by the CJI. This stand appeared as Indian youth turned the unusual comment into an opportunity to provide an instance of the institution. More of that, Indian youngsters, instead of saying anything to the institution, started questioning the older generation who’d not fulfilled their responsibility to provide a better environment for the younger generation. They started questioning the institution: why are we all in this situation? If you all elect the politician, then why have you all been silent for all these years, and why haven't you asked the government to take responsibility?

The satire further changed into a physical protest after a lot of mockery and questions. The satire evolved into a physical protest, driven by demands for better education, free and fair examinations, transparency, and accountability. The physical protest came into action when the NEET exam got leaked, and the action against the responsible authorities has not been taken properly.

·       From Resistance to Accountability

The cockroaches came together to raise concerns over the discrepancies that lay in the system. The "cockroach" label – discussed above – became the centre of intense controversy. Why did it provoke such a strong reaction? The reappropriation was being witnessed by the youth during the massive protest emergence. Youth turned the comment into a satire, which changed the identity of the citizens among the political leadership due to the resistance the young generation showed. Gen-Z demonstrated that an insult aimed against them could be turned into a weapon of their own resistance. "Gen-Z demonstrated that an insult aimed against them could be turned into a weapon of their own resistance — one expressed through the Jantar Mantar protest over the NEET paper leak."

"Since independence, few issues have raised as serious a concern about systemic failure and policy accountability as this one. It underscored the urgent need for citizens to investigate the governance failures that allowed repeated examination irregularities to go unchecked." We can scale this paper leak as crucial to the same condition from the past. It was the need for the citizens to investigate the corrupt governance, which was unable to stop the continuous events from happening. The youngsters raised awareness in society about the need for transparency in governance and about holding the government to its promises for the nation's direction. The exam and education play a crucial role in shaping the social order; if the exam is not fair and the education does not get into the righteous hand, then the system will collapse.

The process of selecting the capable personnel was being compromised; this was the actual reason for the protest. Majorly, this protest was also being backed by the parents of this generation because of the accountability of the government to provide the best medical professionals. "If unqualified students are selected and later assigned to treat patients, can they be expected to do so effectively?" Will that student treat the patient efficiently? If not, who’s responsible? That student or the institution that didn't care before the selection? Students and parents are asking for accountability from the institution.

·       Jantar Mantar: From Protest to Confrontation

The protest at the astronomical observatory extended beyond its designated space when the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) organised a “Chalo Sansad” march on 20 July 2026, demanding accountability for examination irregularities and the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan. Delhi Police stated that permission for the march had not been granted and responded with heavy barricades and security deployment. As protesters attempted to move toward Parliament, clashes broke out between them and security personnel. Police reported that protesters violated prohibitory orders, tried to breach barricades, attacked personnel, and damaged property, resulting in over 118 police injuries (Ojha). Protesters alleged excessive use of force, with reports documenting injuries and the use of lathis and tear gas. However, accounts of the events differ.

A Delhi Police FIR described the crowd as violent and justified the use of “mild lathicharge” and tear gas to protect Parliament and sensitive installations (Ojha). Meanwhile, videos and medical reports suggested disproportionate force against protesters. This confrontation introduced a new dimension of accountability: beyond questioning who was responsible for examination failures, it raised the issue of the state's responsibility when using force against citizens protesting. The Supreme Court later emphasised that peaceful and lawful protest is constitutionally protected, and agitation alone does not justify police excesses, urging discipline and restraint on both sides (G and Vishwanath).

Lincoln’s famous phrase of government, “of the people, by the people, for the people", offers a meaningful way to reflect on the democratic relationship between citizens and the State. In India, this idea is uniquely expressed in the words “We, the People of India” at the beginning of the Preamble, underscoring that the Constitution derives its authority from the people (Preamble). Citizens elect their representatives, and state institutions must operate within the constitutional framework to ensure justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. The gathering at Jantar Mantar can thus be seen as another expression of this relationship—citizens entering public space not only to challenge institutions but also to remind them of the responsibility that comes with the authority entrusted to them.

·       The Question of Responsibility

Protesters: They must exercise their democratic right to dissent in a peaceful and lawful way. Violence, damage to property, or ignoring legal restrictions can’t be justified by valid grievances. The actions of a few individuals shouldn’t be blamed on the whole movement. The real question is: how can protesters keep their demands legitimate while making sure their methods reflect the principles they stand for?

Police: Their job is to maintain public order while respecting the rights and dignity of protesters. When using their authority to manage safety threats, they must act with proportionality and restraint. It’s not just about whether the police acted to control the situation but also about whether they did so while respecting the right to dissent. 

Government: The government’s responsibility goes beyond managing the immediate consequences of protests. It must also address the underlying issues that drive people to protest—whether concerns about exams, recruitment, or the credibility of institutions. True political accountability means responding not only to protests but also to the root causes behind them.

Institutions: Educational and public institutions must protect the integrity and credibility of the systems they oversee. When failures affect students’ futures, it’s not enough to blame individuals or issue administrative fixes. Institutions need transparency, mechanisms for scrutiny, and the ability to reform to rebuild public trust.

Citizens: Responsibility doesn’t rest only with those in power. Citizens also have a duty when exercising their democratic rights. Protesting and questioning authority require informed participation, restraint, and awareness of consequences. Citizens must ask themselves if they can hold institutions accountable while also being accountable for their own actions. Democracy is a relationship where both citizens and institutions answer to the constitutional principles that sustain their bond.

National Security: External Influence and Internal Stability

The events in Nepal in 2025 offer an important regional backdrop to political concerns about youth-led movements in South Asia. The Nepalese Gen-Z protests arose mainly from domestic issues such as corruption, nepotism, economic inequality, and the government’s ban on major social media platforms. Organised largely through digital networks, the movement eventually led to the resignation of Prime Minister K. P. Sharma Oli. However, what followed showed how a mostly peaceful youth mobilisation can become vulnerable to disorder: Human Rights Watch found that some individuals involved in subsequent violence, arson, and attacks on public institutions seemed unconnected to the original Gen-Z movement, with allegations of political infiltration needing further investigation. 

Nepal’s experience raises a question for India, especially given its geographical proximity and close social-political ties: how can a democratic nation distinguish between genuine public mobilisation and efforts to exploit it for disorder or political destabilisation? This does not mean Indian protests should automatically be seen as foreign interference. Rather, Nepal shows that a movement can start with legitimate grievances but later be influenced by actors, misinformation, or conditions hard to separate from the original cause. The lesson is to not distrust dissent but to stay vigilant that genuine grievances can be exploited in a highly connected digital and political environment.

This issue also has a broader geopolitical aspect. During the Cold War, countries were labelled First, Second, and Third Worlds—a classification tied to a specific historical and geopolitical era and not simply to developed or developing status. India’s stance of non-alignment and strategic autonomy gave it a unique place among newly independent states. While these terms have largely lost their political relevance today, the underlying question of strategic autonomy remains: how can India protect its internal democratic processes while navigating a world where information, political narratives, and digital influence cross borders at unprecedented speed?

Thus, the Jantar Mantar protest can be viewed through the lens of maintaining internal stability without suppressing legitimate dissent. A democratic state must protect its sovereignty and prevent genuine public grievances from being turned into violence or disorder; likewise, citizens must ensure their protests do not become vehicles for violence or destruction. Nepal’s experience offers a cautionary example—not proof of an external conspiracy—inviting a harder question: how can India safeguard its democratic institutions from external influence and internal destabilisation while protecting citizens’ rights to question those very institutions? This tension, rather than assumptions of foreign interference, is what makes national security relevant in the story of Jantar Mantar.

Opinion

The Jantar Mantar protest should not be seen simply as a confrontation between students and the government nor reduced to a question of who was right or wrong at the barricades. It represents something deeper: a generation trying to navigate its relationship with the institutions that shape its education, employment, and future. The controversy over the “cockroach” remark, the rise of the Cockroach Janta Party, the demands for examination accountability, and the confrontation at Jantar Mantar each reflect different stages of this evolving relationship. Protecting democratic space is not the responsibility of one side alone. Protesters must maintain the legitimacy of their demands through peaceful, responsible action; institutions must uphold transparency and integrity; the government must remain accountable to the citizens granting it authority; and the police must preserve public order without disregarding the constitutional right to dissent.

At the same time, concerns persist about external actors, including foreign countries, attempting to influence or control the Government of India. This influence can manifest through political interference, misinformation campaigns, or support for groups aiming to sway public opinion or destabilise democratic processes. Safeguarding India’s sovereignty and democratic institutions from such interference is essential to maintaining internal stability and ensuring governance remains accountable to its people. It is equally important to distinguish genuine domestic protests from those that might be exploited or manipulated by external forces seeking political disruption.

The greater lesson may not be whether the protest succeeded or failed but what it reveals about democratic trust. Democracy is not meaningful simply because citizens can vote; it must allow space for questioning, criticism, and holding power accountable. Yet, dissent must be paired with responsibility, just as authority must be coupled with accountability. The events at Jantar Mantar challenge us with this question: when people stand before the institutions they empower, are both sides ready to recognise that democracy requires rights, responsibility, restraint, and accountability? Perhaps the most significant image of Jantar Mantar is not the barricades dividing protesters and police, but the observatory itself. Once built to watch the movements of the heavens, it has become a place where citizens observe the movements of power. “We, the People of India” is not just the Constitution’s opening phrase but a reminder that democratic authority rests with the people. The question is not whether citizens should question the state or whether the state should maintain order, but how both can fulfil these responsibilities without undermining the democratic bond that gives them meaning. In this sense, Jantar Mantar was more than a protest site—it became a site of reflection, where a generation was asking not just to be heard but what it truly means to be heard in a democracy.

Works cited:

1. Kawrani, N. "Jantar Mantar: How an 18th-Century Observatory Became India’s Best-Known Protest Street. "The Better India, 2026, https://thebetterindia.com/culture/jantar-mantar-maharasja-sawai-jai-singh-history-observatory-to-protest-site-delhi-12183868. Accessed 08 Aug. 2026.

2.      Service, E. N. "‘Misquoted by media’: CJI Surya Kant clarifies ‘cockroaches’ remark on unemployed youth | Legal News – The Indian Express." n.d., https://indianexpress.com/article/legal-news/cji-surya-kant-clarifies-cockroaches-remark-fake-degrees-row-10692979/. Accessed 9 Aug. 2026.

3.      Ojha, A. "CJP protest Delhi violence: 70 detained, 118 police personnel injured - India Today." India Today, 2026, https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/cjp-protest-delhi-violence-70-detained-50-police-injured-buses-attacked-2952212-2026-07-20. Accessed 14 Aug. 2026.

4. Ahmed, A. et al. "Thousands protest in India after clashes, despite Modi assuring action on exams | Reuters." n.d., https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-youth-group-says-protest-continue-after-delhi-clashes-injure-180-2026-07-21/. Accessed 14 Aug. 2026.

5. G, A., and Vishwanath A. "Right to peaceful protest guaranteed; police excesses can be examined: Supreme Court | Legal News - The Indian Express." n.d., https://indianexpress.com/article/legal-news/cant-lathicharge-just-because-there-was-agitation-supreme-court-says-on-cjp-protests-10805269/. Accessed 14 Aug. 2026.

6. "Preamble - Constitution of India." Constitution of India, 2023, https://www.constitutionofindia.net/articles/preamble/. Accessed 14 Aug. 2026.

7.      Naipaul, V. S. India: A Million Mutinies Now. Heinemann, 1990.

8.      Human Rights Watch. Nepal: Unlawful Use of Force During 'Gen Z' Protest." Human Rights Watch, 20 Nov. 2025, www.hrw.org/news/2025/11/20/nepal-unlawful-use-of-force-during-gen-z-protest. Accessed 14 Aug. 2026.

🇮🇳 Happy Independence Day to all readers! 🇮🇳