In Gujarat, dissent is not debated. It is disciplined. Three young voices associated with AISA, SFI, Congress and the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) have reported their Instagram accounts being blocked amid a protest in Ahmedabad demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. What began as a demonstration over alleged irregularities in electoral rolls soon became a confrontation over the right to protest, with police detentions and social media suspensions adding to the controversy.
The protest was planned near MJ Library in Ahmedabad’s Ellisbridge area at around 6:30 pm. The demonstrators wanted to raise questions about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and demand Kumar’s resignation. Their slogans included “vote thief, step down”, “remove Gyanesh Kumar” and “save democracy”.
But several protesters alleged that they were stopped before they could assemble at the designated venue.
A protest that could not gather at its planned venue
Police blocked roads leading to the Ellisbridge crossroads as a heavy force was deployed in the area. According to reports, around 200 police personnel were stationed near MJ Library to prevent law-and-order problems and avoid inconvenience to the public.
The deployment reportedly included officers from two police zones, the Crime Branch, the Special Operations Group (SOG) and the Economic Offences Wing (EOW). Senior officers, including a Joint Commissioner of Police, four Deputy Commissioners of Police and several Assistant Commissioners of Police and Police Inspectors, were also present.
As the gathering was restricted near MJ Library, some protesters reportedly moved from Paldi and Ambawadi towards Parimal Garden, raising slogans along the way.
Police confirmed that more than 70 people had been detained, while other estimates put the number at over 100. Those detained were taken in police buses and vans to police stations in Vasna, Vejalpur, Sarkhej and Ellisbridge.
Police confirmed that more than 70 people had been detained, while other estimates put the number at over 100. Those detained were taken in police buses and vans to police stations in Vasna, Vejalpur, Sarkhej and Ellisbridge.
Activists alleged that several people were picked up before they had a chance to join the demonstration.
An 87-year-old protester and women among those detained
The police action drew further criticism after organisers reported that women, journalists and senior citizens were among those detained.
One of them was reportedly an 87-year-old man who recalled being jailed during the 1975 Emergency. He said he was prepared to go to jail again rather than stop raising his voice.
For the demonstrators, the issue went beyond being prevented from gathering. They argued that the action had denied them the opportunity to hold a peaceful protest.
Instagram accounts suspended as protests unfold
Alongside the detentions, several protest-linked Instagram accounts were reportedly suspended while the demonstration was underway.
The accounts included those of Jay Thakkar, CJP Gujarat convenor; Subodh Kumud, a Congress leader and activist; Student and Youth Collective Ahmedabad (SYCA); and activist Dhruv Desai.
In an interview, Jay Thakkar said, “The government has banned our account because it does not like what we are saying.”
Subodh Kumud said his account was suspended during the protest, briefly restored and then suspended again without prior notice. The reported suspensions raised questions among those associated with the protest, although the reasons for the platform’s action were not established in the information available.
The timing added another layer to the controversy. While protesters alleged that they were being prevented from gathering on the streets, some of those connected with the movement also reported losing access to their social media accounts.
The two developments became central to the protesters’ criticism of how dissent was being handled.
Why were protesters demanding the CEC’s resignation?
At the centre of the demonstration was the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, an exercise that protesters alleged had led to the deletion of nearly 13 crore names nationally and more than 68 lakh voters in Gujarat.
They questioned the transparency of the process and argued that sufficient safeguards were not in place to protect eligible voters. Their demands included electoral reforms and the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.
Political activists and young people, including members of Gen-Z, were among those who attempted to join the demonstration. NSUI leader Shubham Thakar, who had earlier waved black flags at Kumar’s convoy during the CEC’s visit to Ahmedabad, was also detained.
Thakar threatened to organise a chakka jam, or road blockade, in Ahmedabad in the coming days. Activist Subodh Parmar also said people were detained while preparing to gather near MJ Library.
The question that remains
The police said the deployment was necessary to prevent a law-and-order situation and inconvenience to the public. Protesters, meanwhile, questioned why they were not allowed to assemble and voice their objections.
The episode has brought three issues into the same frame: the right to peaceful assembly, questions over electoral roll revisions and the reported suspension of accounts belonging to people associated with the protest.
A protest can be restricted on lawful grounds, and allegations made by participants require verification. But when people say they were detained before they could gather, and social media accounts linked to the demonstration are reported suspended at the same time, questions about the space available for public dissent become difficult to ignore.
The immediate confrontation unfolded around MJ Library. The larger question is whether citizens can challenge an electoral process, organise a peaceful demonstration and make their concerns heard without their ability to assemble becoming the next point of dispute.
