The story so far: Mobile Internet services were shut down in parts of Central Delhi during the Chalo Sansad protest organised by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). Thousands of people, led by the CJP, gathered on the opening day of the Monsoon Session of Parliament to demand the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan following repeated instances of examination paper leaks in connection with the administration of the National Eligibility and Entrance Test (NEET), among other demands. The Internet shutdown, which remained in place until the evening, drew condemnation from the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) and the Software Freedom Law Centre, India (SFLC).

Reportedly, signal jammers had been deployed to disrupt access to the Internet during the protest. Protesters faced difficulties uploading videos and using navigation apps.

What is an Internet shutdown?

According to web rights advocacy organisation Access Now, an Internet shutdown is defined as “an intentional disruption of Internet or electronic communications, rendering them inaccessible or effectively unusable, for a specific population or within a location, often to exert control over the flow of information.” They take many forms, from full network disruptions to slowing down Internet speed (“throttling”) or blocking platforms.

Most Internet shutdowns are ordered when large numbers of people are expected to gather for political reasons, peaceful demonstrations, violent protests or religious celebrations, according to the International Federation of Journalists. Some are preventive measures imposed in anticipation of an event, while others are introduced to control ongoing incidents.

When can the government legally suspend Internet services during a protest?

Under Section 20(2)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, telecommunication services may be suspended only on the occurrence of a public emergency or in the interest of public safety, on the grounds specified in that provision, and for reasons recorded in writing.

“A protest, by itself, is not a lawful ground for suspending Internet services. Under Section 20(2) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023, a suspension may be ordered only during a public emergency or in the interest of public safety, and only for specified purposes such as maintaining public order. The order must be reasoned, published, limited in area and duration, and issued by the competent authority under the Telecommunications Suspension Rules, 2024. The government must also consider whether less restrictive measures would be sufficient,” said Apar Gupta, Advocate and Founder of the Internet Freedom Foundation.

Which law governs Internet shutdowns?

Internet shutdowns in India were earlier governed by Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017. These have now been replaced by Section 20 of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and the Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024.

“The publication of such Internet suspension orders is necessary and mandatory for ensuring transparency, accountability and proportionality, as required by Rule 3(2) of the Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024, read with Section 20(2)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. The law states that each order is not only required to be published but should also include crucial details such as the date, time, duration, and the specific area where the suspension will be in effect,” SFLC said in a statement.

Despite the updated legal framework, a review by the Digital Defenders Network found that several shutdown orders issued by State governments since late 2024 continue to invoke Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the 2017 Rules.

For instance, the Secretary, Home Department, Uttar Pradesh, issued an Internet suspension order applicable to the district of Bareilly on October 2, 2025, invoking Section 7 of the Telegraph Act read with Rule 2(1) of the 2017 Rules. Similarly, the Secretary, Home Department, Manipur, on June 7, 2025, issued an order suspending mobile data, VSAT and VPN services by relying on the 2017 Rules.

By continuing to rely on these outdated provisions, some States appear to have bypassed the procedural safeguards introduced under the 2024 Rules. When it comes to jamming of Internet shutdown, “the authority for implementing network jamming is purportedly exercised and claimed sometimes by the local police under criminal law” said Mr. Gupta.

The current suspension order accessed by The Hindu as released by the Ministry of Home Affairs, was imposed across 150 cell sites according to an Industry source. It stated that the order was imposed under Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 20 of The Telecommunication Act, 2023 read with 2024 Rules. In the interest of public safety, public order, averting public emergency, and preventing incitement to offences.

Where does India stand in terms of Internet shutdowns?

India continues to record one of the highest numbers of Internet shutdowns in the world. Access Now’s 2025 report recorded 65 shutdowns across 12 States and Union Territories. While this was lower than in previous years, the scale remains exceptional for a constitutional democracy.

Historically, Jammu & Kashmir has recorded the highest number of Internet shutdowns in the country, with about 449 since 2012, followed by Rajasthan (115) and Manipur (62), according to the SFLC Internet Shutdown Tracker.

India has recorded about 24 shutdowns in 2026 (as of July 22).

What limits has the Supreme Court placed on Internet shutdowns?

In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court held that access to the Internet is closely connected to the freedoms of speech and trade under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g).

The Court held that any shutdown must be backed by law, pursue a legitimate objective, be necessary and proportionate, and be the least restrictive measure available. Orders must also be limited in scope and duration, accompanied by detailed reasons, published and reviewed by a competent committee.

The Court further held that indefinite shutdowns are impermissible and that any order suspending internet services must be reviewed by a multi-member Review Committee within five working days.

The Court observed that “complete broad suspension of telecom services, be it the Internet or otherwise, being a drastic measure, must be considered by the State only if ‘necessary’ and ‘unavoidable’. In furtherance of the same, the State must assess the existence of an alternate less intrusive remedy.”

Mr. Gupta pointed out that the Review Committee can direct the government to withdraw an unlawful order. However, IFF’s RTI findings show that shutdown orders and review records are often not published consistently, weakening these safeguards in practice.

The case set a precedent requiring the publication of shutdown orders. However, according to the Oxford Human Rights Hub, out of the 428 internet shutdowns recorded between 2020 and 2024, a majority of the State governments responsible for these shutdowns continued not to publish the orders for public access. This failure violates not only the Supreme Court’s judgment in Anuradha Bhasin, but also principles of natural justice.

Can the orders be challenged in court?

Yes. A shutdown may be challenged before a High Court under Article 226 or, in an appropriate case, before the Supreme Court under Article 32. Courts can examine whether the order was lawful, necessary, proportionate and properly limited in area and duration.

“Indefinite suspensions are unlawful. The government must publish its orders, consider less restrictive alternatives and provide reasons capable of judicial review. Under the 2024 Rules, a suspension order cannot remain in force for more than 15 days,” Mr. Gupta said

Police personnel using lathi charge to disperse supporters of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) during a protest march to demanding the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over alleged NEET exam irregularities, near Parliament House, in New Delhi on Monday. July 20, 2026.
| Photo Credit: Shiv Kumar Pushpakar

Scene after supporters of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) were dispersed by the police during the protest march demanding the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over alleged NEET exam irregularities, at Sansad Marg, near Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi.
| Photo Credit: Shiv Kumar Pushpakar

Police cracked down on a protest called by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) in Delhi on Monday (July 20, 2026). The police action on one of the largest protests in the national capital in recent years left several people injured.

Follow CJP protest in Delhi LIVE updates

At least 38 of the injured were taken to the Lady Hardinge Medical College and around 65 to the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, said sources., with fractures, swelling due to tear gas, and head and eye injuries.

The police swung into action amid an internet shutdown in the New Delhi district, even as CJP representatives Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka met with Union Minister J.P. Nadda to formally seek Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation.

Seeing the “brutality with which peacefully protesting youth are being dealt with”, climate activist Sonam Wangchuk said he will continue fasting “until the youth leaders are allowed to meet the parliamentarians at the Sansad Bhawan, or I am allowed to meet them here at the hospital.”

Mr. Das and Mr. Ranka said Mr. Nadda had told them he would discuss the demands with the government. However, the CJP was still waiting for a response, Mr. Das said in the evening, adding: “The protest is continuing at Jantar Mantar.”

Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi condemned the police action and wrote on X: “When these children raised legitimate questions about education — they were met with lathis and detention in response… The criminals who leaked the papers roam free…”

Waves of protest

The protests brought to the fore the growing discontent over the NEET paper leak and irregularities in the CBSE school examination process. Slogans of “Dharmendra Pradhan, isteefa do” (resign) boomed.

Earlier, CJP leaders did not begin the march to Parliament in the morning, having established contact with the government through New Delhi’s deputy commissioner of police.

Waves of youth and students arrived, even as nearby Delhi Metro stations shut the exits. Government officials and Parliament staff, who were not allowed to exit the Central Secretariat station, were seen arguing with CISF and Delhi Police personnel. Many employees of Rail Bhawan were seen cheering the protesters and making videos, while standing outside office buildings.

By early afternoon, hundreds of protesters slipped through barricades onto Sansad Marg, heading southwest to the new Parliament building. When they were a few hundred metres away from the Parliament house, security forces lathi-charged a small gathering, around which time mobile internet too was cut at 150 spots across central Delhi.

Dozens of protesters were detained, and injuries were reported among police officers, though there was no detailed statement from Delhi Police on the number of injuried and the nature of police action. CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke, who broke his fast, and Mr. Wangchuk’s wife Gitanjali J. Angmo, were briefly detained and assaulted, CJP alleged. Delhi Police denied both claims.

The crackdown spread in the hours that followed. With a communications blackout slowing the flow of images and videos from the protest site, police continued lathi-charging and lobbing teargas shells on multiple occasions in Jantar Mantar, Patel Chowk, India Gate, Connaught Place, and other parts of the area where large groups continued to protest. Police denied using disproportionate force. 

Nadda meet

CJP spokespersons met Mr. Nadda at 4 p.m. The CJP demanded Mr. Pradhan’s resignation, Mr. Wangchuk’s release from the hospital, and ₹1 crore in compensation to families affected by NEET-related suicides.

Mr. Wangchuk had indicated that he was on the verge of calling off his fast if MPs met him and assured him that they would raise the issue of education in the Monsoon Session. A Delhi High Court judge had prevented Mr. Wangchuk from shifting out of the hospital. A division bench upheld that refusal on Monday (July 20), posting the matter to Tuesday (July 21).

During the police lathi charge at Jantar Mantar, the crowd ran towards the Janata Dal (United) office causing a wall to collapse. Three AISA activists on hunger strike were injured during the incident and moved out.

(With inputs from Shrimansi Kaushik, Sreeparna Chakraborty, Ashna Butani, and Sobhana K)

Published – July 20, 2026 11:16 pm IST

Scene after disperse supporters of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) during a protest march to demanding the resignation of Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over alleged NEET exam irregularities, at Sansad Marg, near Parliament Street Police Station in New Delhi on Monday (July 20, 2026).
| Photo Credit: SHIV KUMAR PUSHPAKAR