BSP president Mayawati on Sunday (September 6, 2026) expressed concern that movements centred on the problems of Gen-Z youth and unemployed people were being “hijacked” by political parties, claiming this had raised serious doubts among young people and students.

In a post on X, the former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister said there were numerous examples in the country that had led people to believe that the CJP’s Gen-Z movement concerning the burning issues of youth, students and unemployed people had increasingly become political rather than remaining independent.

She said the youth and students who were shown “big dreams” during the Jantar Mantar movement were now facing serious doubts as various political parties had allegedly taken over such movements.

Mayawati, however, said the BSP had always sympathised with and remained concerned about the legitimate demands of Gen-Z and Gen-Alpha.

She said all BSP state units had been directed to meet the authorities concerned in their respective states and regions, and remain ready to help ensure a peaceful resolution of the problems faced by young people.

At the same time, Mayawati said BSP workers, in accordance with party discipline, should not participate in dharnas, demonstrations or agitations and should instead “conserve their physical, mental and financial strength and energy for elections”.

She said the BSP’s objective was to form a government based on the principle of “Sarvajan Hitay, Sarvajan Sukhay (welfare and happiness for all)” and provide lasting solutions to the problems of Gen-Z, Gen-Alpha and all sections of society.

The BSP chief claimed that the party had demonstrated this during its four terms in power in Uttar Pradesh.

Referring to the alleged assault of Sanjay Azad during the Gen-Z movement at Jantar Mantar, Mayawati said the serious incident could have been avoided had the police taken appropriate action in time.

She demanded the strictest legal action against those accused in the case and said the BSP would not remain behind in raising its voice in such matters if necessary.

The case pertains to the alleged assault of Mr. Azad, who is the father of a minor activist, by Hindutva influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj, causing the former a head injury. Bhardwaj was arrested in connection with the case after boasting about the alleged assault and impunity afforded to him “due to his ties” with BJP leaders and a minister in a podcast.

Members of the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), including Saurav Das and Nishu Aazad, along with their supporters are protesting at the Parliament Street police station on Friday (September 4, 2026), seeking a revisit of the FIR registered over an assault on Ms. Nishu’s father, Sanjay Kumar, during the students protest that took place at Jantar Mantar in July.

There is a heavy police deployment outside the police station.

The development comes after a video surfaced online featuring the alleged accused Swatantra Bhardwaj, in which he purportedly spoke about the assault and claimed he “had not been jailed,” triggering fresh questions over the police action in the case. CJP members have alleged that the case should have included a more stringent provision for attempt to murder or grievous hurt and have also raised allegations of political interference.

Mr. Das said the CJP has not left the students or protesters to “fight this battle alone” and alleged that Mr. Bhardwaj had openly spoken about attacking Mr. Sanjay, who had been peacefully protesting over issues concerning NEET students.

“Sanjayji’s case is harrowing. Gang members like Swatantra Bhardwaj are openly flaunting that they attempted to murder Sanjayji, who was simply peacefully protesting for NEET students. Sanjayji was brutally attacked and barely survived,” Mr. Das said.

He said he and other CJP members would seek justice for Mr. Sanjay and Ms. Nishu at the police station, arguing that the alleged statements by Mr. Bhardwaj amounted to an admission of the assault.

Mr. Das had earlier alleged that the injury was severe enough to warrant an attempt-to-murder charge, describing the wound as having been of a size that, in his view, warranted invoking Section 307 of the IPC. He alleged that the police refused to add the provision and also declined his request to invoke provisions relating to grievous hurt. “Sanjayji’s skull was cracked open. The wound dimensions were of such great size that it obviously warranted an Attempt to Murder charge in the FIR,” Mr. Das had said, while alleging that the police asked them to obtain a court order for stronger sections.

He had also alleged that other persons who were with Mr. Bhardwaj during the incident had not been identified and claimed that some of them had subsequently posted videos threatening Mr. Sanjay’s minor daughter, Mr. Nishu.

However, Delhi Police have disputed the CJP’s account of the nature of the injury and denied any political interference in the case.

Newly-appointed Delhi Deputy Commissioner of Police Sachin Sharma said that on July 23, during a CJP protest at Jantar Mantar, Sanjay Kumar (38), a resident of Ghaziabad, sustained a head injury from a kada (metal bangle) worn by one of the alleged accused during a scuffle.

According to the police, Mr. Sanjay was medically examined by doctors at Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital and the injuries were opined to be simple in nature. The police said the injury was caused by a kada and not a weapon, and that the claim of a crack in the skull was not supported by the medical examination report.

“On his statement, a case under relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita was registered at PS Parliament Street,” the official said. The police said the accused were detained at the spot and that during the investigation, Suraj Kumar (24), and Swatantra Bhardwaj (21), were served notices and interrogated. A chargesheet is expected to be filed before the competent court, police said.

The DCP also rejected allegations that the investigation had been influenced or that anyone had interfered with the case, saying it has been handled in accordance with law and procedure.

The renewed dispute comes following CJP’s prolonged protest at Jantar Mantar over alleged irregularities in competitive examinations and its July 20 march towards Parliament. Thousands of protesters had gathered in Delhi for the proposed march on the opening day of the Monsoon Session, with the agitation subsequently becoming a major confrontation between protesters and security personnel.

CJP members have now sought a fresh examination of the action taken in Mr. Sanjay’s case, particularly the sections invoked in the FIR and the role of others allegedly involved in the assault. Mr. Das had earlier said that the police refused to invoke attempt to murder provisions and claimed that the family had been asked to approach a court for the relevant sections.

The police, however, maintain that the medical opinion did not support the allegations of a grievous or life-threatening injury and that the investigation has proceeded strictly according to the available evidence.

The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday (August 5, 2026) struck a parental tone, saying reasoning with students, youths and organisers involved in the NEET-UG paper leaks protests would be a better option than taking an aggressive tone with them.

“A better way is to counsel them, pacify them… The most powerful resource is reasoning. To listen to them. The government knows how to deal with it,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said.

The court was hearing a petition filed by a retired Air Force officer, Manish Kumar Solanki, who said the government was on the “backfoot” bringing the “so-called organisers” of the Cockroach Janta Party-linked (CJP) demonstration against the paper leak and the ensuing police crackdown and violence which rocked the national capital on July 20.

The counsel for Mr. Solanki said 15 days have passed since the July 20 incident, but there has been no move to make the organisers accountable. He said the CJP was not even a registered organisation.

“The government is bending backwards to accommodate them. Violence, meanwhile, is continuing. A youth died in Rajasthan. In society, everybody is important, including the farmers who had agitated and the protestors of Shaheen Bagh… If the government is on the backfoot, society and the institutions of law cannot be seen to be on the backfoot,” advocate Rizwan Ahmed, appearing for the petitioner, submitted.

He asked why the nation and the society should tolerate a “dangerous precedent”.

“Stone-pelters cannot be allowed to go scot-free just because the government is on the back foot. Tomorrow, Generation Alpha, Beta, Gamma may come… Farmers will take tractors to the Parliament, the temple of democracy,” Mr. Ahmed argued.

He said the NEET-UG protest organisers were continuing to fan the fires, “moving from channel to channel who give them time on a silver platter”. The petitioner suggested that the “young boys and girls” should be asked to do seven days of community service.

But the Chief Justice advised conciliation, counselling and peace.

“Youngsters are required to be pacified, even if some among them are involved in stone-pelting. They need a lot of advice and counselling. Any aggression will only unnecessarily aggravate the situation and lead to further violations. That needs to be avoided,” Chief Justice Kant said.

The Chief Justice said restraint on the part of the law enforcement agencies was better than the use of force while dealing with the young generation. A peaceful agitation could turn violent; it was up to the government to ensure the situation did not spiral out of control.

“In a democratic movement, what starts with a peaceful objective, and then some incident takes place, forces need to have a lot of restraint to ensure that the situation does not go out of hand,” Chief Justice Kant noted.

The court said continuing incidents of violence involving youths must be dealt with carefully to avoid them snowballing into another violent confrontation.

“Stray incidents, wherever they are happening, authorities need to step carefully to avoid any further violence… ” A better way is to counsel and pacify them,” the Chief Justice reiterated the message to soothe rather than agitate Gen Z.

The court tagged the petition with a bunch of pleas dealing with the NEET-UG protests to be heard along with them on August 18.

New Delh The Congress on Friday (July 31, 2026) took a swipe at Prime Minister Narendra Modi over his “forgive children” video message and said that while the country was asking the PM to apologise, he had instead “forgiven the country”.

Mr. Modi on Friday (July 31, 2026) said he and even his late mother were subjected to abusive language at Jantar Mantar during the protests over NEET irregularities, but asserted that dragging such “misguided children” into court would not resolve the problem and hence, he wanted to forgive them.

Tagging the PM’s video and post, Congress’ media and publicity department head Pawan Khera said in a post on X in Hindi, “Listen to this. The country is asking him to apologise, yet he has forgiven the country.” In another late-night video message released on Instagram, the Prime Minister said he could understand the anguish prevailing in society, but stressed that this was the time to embrace the youth and guide them on the right path.

लो कर लो बात।
देश इनसे माफ़ी मांगने को कह रहा है, इन्होंने देश को माफ़ कर दिया। https://t.co/p9JIdnokmp

— Pawan Khera ಪವನ್ ಖೇರಾ (@Pawankhera) July 31, 2026

“Not only was I subjected to abusive language at Jantar Mantar, but even my late mother was abused there. But abuses never solve anything; let’s guide the misguided,” he said.

Mr. Modi described the students as “misguided children” and said punishing them or making them go through court proceedings will not solve the problem.

“I want to forgive them. People make mistakes, but this is a cultural shock that our daughters are using such abusive language. We must forgive our youth who were misguided; after all, they are our children. It’s our duty to show them the right path,” he said.