Between Shaheen Bagh and Jantar Mantar: decoding India's new politics of protest

Shaheen Bagh, Farmer Movement—where is the gathering of cockroaches different?

In India, over the last decade, one mass movement after another has shaken central politics. Sometimes the movement of Shaheen Bagh against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), sometimes the long movement of farmers, and again sometimes university-based student protests. Every movement had its own character. In 2026, the anti-NEET-corruption movement that started at Jantar Mantar in Delhi, despite having similarities with previous mass movements, emerged as a different and new type of movement from many angles.

Many may consider this movement just like any other protest. But looking a bit deeper, it becomes clear that in terms of this movement's social base, participants' mindset, demands, nature of leadership, and political impact—in all aspects, there are differences with the previous movements.

The commencement of this movement was centred around the education system. On 16 May, Abhijit Deepak announced a new platform named 'Cockroach Janata Party' (CJP). After rapidly gaining familiarity on social media, on 20 June, holding a copy written by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, carrying the symbol of the Constitution's values, began an indefinite sit-in at Delhi's Jantar Mantar. Their primary allegation is that widespread irregularities occurred in the NEET exam, and taking moral responsibility for that incident, Central Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan should resign. At the same time, they also raised demands for the accountability and reform of the entire education system. From the very beginning of the movement, the call for peaceful protest with the Constitution in hand was one of the key symbols.

In the initial stage, those in the movement were mainly male and female students, examinees, guardians, and young men and women. Within a few weeks, the movement's scope began to expand. Environmental activist and educator Sonam Wangchuk sat on a hunger strike. Through court intervention, police security, his transfer to the hospital, support from opposition parties, and finally under the call for the 'Chalo Sansad' (March to Parliament) program, the movement rose to the center of national discussion.

The biggest feature of this movement is that here the protesters have primarily taken to the streets with their own life experiences. Someone's child committed suicide due to mental stress centred around the NEET exam, someone has been preparing for the exam for many years, someone will appear for the exam next year. Before the news media, 16-17-year-old teenage boys and girls have also said that if there is no faith in the examination process itself, then where is their future? That is to say, at the very root of this movement lies a real crisis connected with one's own future, hard work, and life.

Right at this point, a big difference is created with the movement of Shaheen Bagh. After the Citizenship Amendment Act was passed in Parliament in December 2019, countrywide protests began. Following the police raid at Jamia Millia Islamia University on 15 December, a few ordinary Muslim women started a peaceful sit-in at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi. Not at the call of any political party, without any prior planning—that protest which started spontaneously gained global recognition within a few months.

The most notable feature of the Shaheen Bagh movement was that it was primarily an expression of concern regarding the civic rights of the minority community. Many people came there who personally had no apprehension of facing any immediate problem due to CAA or NRC. They came to stand beside the minority community. That is to say, the moral foundation of the movement was solidarity, empathy, and taking a stance in favor of others' rights.

Of course, Muslim women were the main force there. But beside them were Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Dalits, male and female students, artists, professors, lawyers, and ordinary people of various classes. Shaheen Bagh gradually turned into a cultural and intellectual space alongside protest. Constitution reading, poetry, songs, art, discussion—all combined, it became an alternative democratic space.

Inspired by this movement, similar sit-in movements began in many places including Park Circus in Kolkata, Ghantaghar in Lucknow, and Bilal Bagh in Bengaluru. Holding children in their laps, women continued the movement day after day at Park Circus. Students from Jadavpur, Presidency, and Aliah Universities also joined there.

Today, when allegations are rising about a large number of women's names being dropped in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process of the voter list in Bihar and West Bengal, the memory of Shaheen Bagh is returning anew to many. Because in administrative processes related to citizenship and identity, women face the most problems. Many women do not possess land, property, or necessary documents in their names. According to information from The Hindu, names of nearly 47 lakh voters have been excluded in the SIR in Bihar, among whom 55 to 60 percent are women. In Assam's NRC as well, 70 percent of the 19 lakh people excluded in Assam are women. In West Bengal, after the SIR (Special Intensive Revision) or the special intensive revision process of the voter list, names of nearly 61 lakh 93 thousand (61,93,386) female voters have been excluded from the list, which is about 61.8% of the total excluded voters. As a result, the question of concern regarding civic identity remains relevant even now.

But the character of the NEET movement is somewhere else. Here the protesters are carrying out the movement not on behalf of anyone else, but to protect their own future. This self-interest is not a negative word. Rather, in a democracy, when a citizen takes to the streets to protect their own rights, their own hard work, and their own future, the social foundation of that movement can become even broader.

Even when compared with the farmers' movement, a similar type of difference catches the eye. In 2020, as the Central Government passed three controversial farm laws, the long movement of farmers began. The allegation of farmers' organizations was that these laws would benefit corporate houses and make farmers even weaker in the market. The allegation of the opposition was that the bills were passed without adequate discussion in Parliament.

In 2024 as well, under multiple demands including legal recognition for Minimum Support Price, farmers of Punjab and Haryana again took up the Delhi Chalo program. Barbed wire at the border, concrete barricades, tear gas, rubber bullets, water cannons—everything was used. The death of a young farmer named Shubhkaran Singh also became one of the symbols of that movement. Vast areas of Punjab and Haryana were blockaded. Tractor rallies took place. More than 250 organizations joined in this movement.

Agriculture is connected with the livelihood of crores of people in India. After a long movement, the Central Government was forced to withdraw the three farm laws. Politically too, the impact of this movement was clearly seen. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP fell behind in many seats where the impact of the farmers' movement was highest. Nationwide, the number of seats came down from 303 to 240. The BJP lost in a total of 38 seats combining the regions of those who joined the farmers' movement. In the list are Western Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Northern Rajasthan, and multiple onion-producing regions of Maharashtra. In 2019, the BJP had won in 10 seats in farmer-majority regions in Haryana. In 2024, 5 seats decreased in that very region. The BJP lost in two such seats in Punjab as well. In Rajasthan, the BJP had received 24 out of 25 seats in 2019. This time, they achieved victory in only 14 seats there. In Maharashtra's onion-producing region, there were a total of 13 Lok Sabha constituencies, out of which the BJP lost in 12 seats. Among the mass movements that have claimed the most human lives, the farmers' movement is one. Under the impact of the farmers' movement, the BJP government did not get a single majority. That a nationwide movement is no trivial matter became even clearer after the declaration of election results.

According to NCRB data, between 2014 and 2022, more than one lakh farmers committed suicide. The calculation of an average of nearly 30 farmers committing suicide daily explains the depth of the agricultural crisis. During the movement, many farmers were also attacked by calling them 'Khalistanis', 'traitors', and 'terrorists'.

However, there is a fundamental difference between the farmers' movement and the NEET movement. The farmers' movement was primarily on the question of livelihood and economics. The NEET movement is on the question of future and equality of opportunity. A farmer is asking for a fair price for his produce, while a student is asking that there be a fair evaluation of his hard work. In both cases, there is the question of the state's accountability, but the social experience is different.

Another important comparison comes in the context of the post-2020 Delhi violence arrests. Multiple student leaders including Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam were arrested under various sections including the UAPA. The Delhi Police FIR was at the centre of controversy for a long time. At that time, the question of the state, civic rights, and freedom of expression was at the focal point of the movement.

At the beginning of the NEET movement, that kind of political language was not present much. The first demand was clear—the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and reform of the education system. But with time, the situation began to change.

After multiple videos of police lathi-charge, strict action against movement participants, and attempts to suppress the movement spread on social media, a change is seen in the character of the movement as well. Many of those who were initially protesting only against NEET corruption are now raising questions regarding the reaction of the state as well. Signs are being seen of administrative demands gradually turning into broader political questions.

This change is not new in the history of India's mass movements. Many movements have started with a specific demand and later turned into broader political debates centered around the conduct of the state. Just as in Shaheen Bagh, the question moved from CAA towards the Constitution and civic rights, in the farmers' movement, the question reached from farm laws towards the method of democratic decision-making. In the NEET movement as well, the question is gradually moving from education towards the accountability of the state.

Yet, the biggest strength of this movement is still its social base. Here a large section of the movement participants are not political workers. They are examinees, guardians, teachers, coaching students, or future examinees. For that reason, this movement is directly striking a chord inside the middle-class and lower-middle-class families of society.

And right here, Delhi's present movement is clearly different from previous mass movements. At the focal point of the Shaheen Bagh movement was concern regarding citizenship and religious identity. In particular, the question of protecting the constitutional rights and identity of the minority community became most important there. Many people participated in that movement who personally had no apprehension of being impacted by CAA or NRC. They had taken to the streets primarily to stand beside the rights of others.

On the other hand, the main question of the farmers' movement was livelihood, fair price, and the economic security of farmers. And the character of the anti-NEET-corruption movement is completely different. This movement has no direct relationship with religion or identity. Here people have only one demand—transparency in the education system, fair evaluation of hard work, and certainty of the future. Therefore, in this movement, people have taken to the streets not for someone else, but to protect their own future, their own hard work, and their own dreams.

In a democracy, all three types of movements have separate significance. One raises the question of civic rights, one raises the question of economic justice, and again another raises the question of equality of opportunity and the credibility of state institutions. Delhi's present movement represents that third stream. However, after recent police actions and allegations of force used against movement participants, this movement too is gradually not remaining limited merely within the education system. Its political impact is also expanding progressively. History says that many mass movements have taken a turn right at this point—where, starting from a specific demand, the movement has entered a broader discussion on the state, democracy, and civic rights. Whether Delhi's present movement is also advancing on that path, the answer will be given by the Indian politics of the coming days.