New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday declined to grant immediate relief to Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke in connection with the blocking of the Cockroach Janta Partywhich was suspended on alleged National Security Grounds.

The court, however, issued notices to the Center and social media platform. X Account Suspensionseeking their response to the petition challenging the suspension of the viral account.

Who owns Cockroach Party? Haryana-based lawyer wants to get CJP registered under his name

Court Says Matter Has ‘Far-Reaching Consequences’

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that any interim relief in the matter could only be considered after hearing the government, noting that the issue carries “far-reaching consequences”. The court posted the matter for further hearing on July 6.

The petition was filed by Dipke after the Cockroach Janta Party’s handle was blocked despite gaining significant traction online through political satire, memes and commentary targeting the system.

Viral Online Movement Faces Setbacks

The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) emerged as a widely discussed social media phenomenonparticularly among Gen Z and millennial users. Its unconventional campaign style and satirical political messaging attracted large engagement online.

Apart from the suspension of the

Dipke had earlier criticized the BJP-led central government over the action, alleging that the shutdown reflected a “dictatorial” approach toward dissent and satire on digital platforms.

Don’t Take It So Sentimental: CJI Surya Kant as Cockroach Janta Party row reaches Supreme Court

CJP Claimed Massive Online Support

According to Dipke, nearly 10 lakh people had signed up with the initiative before the account was blocked. The movement gained additional attention after being linked to a controversial “cockroach” remark involving Chief Justice of India Surya Kant.

The remark later sparked widespread debate on social media, although the CJI subsequently clarified that he respected India’s youth and did not intend to offend anyone.

The High Court is now expected to examine the legal basis behind the suspension and the larger questions surrounding free speech, platform regulation and national security in the digital space.