Quick answer: NDTV reports that Chief Justice of India Surya Kant told an advocate “Don’t take it so sentimentally” after the advocate sought urgent hearing of a petition concerning the Cockroach Janta Party controversy. The plea reportedly alleged that a distorted narrative was being spread despite the CJI’s clarification, and sought action over the alleged commercial or selective circulation of courtroom oral observations.
First the remark became a movement. Then the movement became a controversy. Now the controversy has returned to the Supreme Court.
And the response was: don’t take it so sentimentally.
What NDTV reported
According to NDTV, an advocate mentioned a writ petition before the Supreme Court concerning the controversy around the recent “cockroach” remarks. The advocate sought urgent hearing and alleged that, even after the CJI’s clarification, a “distorted and malicious narrative” was still being spread.
Chief Justice Surya Kant reportedly responded:
“Don’t take it so sentimentally.”
NDTV further reports that the CJI said there was “no such great emergency” and that the court would consider the matter.
What the petition was about
The petition, as reported by NDTV, was not only about the Cockroach Janta Party. It raised broader concerns about how oral exchanges inside courtrooms are circulated, clipped, commercialised, or selectively used online.
The advocate reportedly sought a declaration that oral courtroom exchanges should not be commercially utilised or selectively circulated in a way that distorts judicial proceedings.
The petition also reportedly sought action against those allegedly involved in commercial exploitation of oral observations made during court proceedings.
The fake law degrees angle
NDTV also reports that the petition sought a CBI probe in connection with statements made by the Bar Council of India Chairperson about the alleged existence of “35 to 40 percent fake law degrees.”
That detail matters because the CJI’s clarification after the original controversy had focused on fake and bogus degrees in the legal profession, not on criticising unemployed youth generally.
The original controversy
The CJP controversy began after oral remarks in court were reported and circulated online. NDTV recounts that Chief Justice Surya Kant had referred to “parasites” attacking the system and, in the same background, made the remark about youngsters “like cockroaches” who do not get employment or a place in a profession and then become media, social media, RTI activists or other activists and start attacking everyone.
That line became the spark.
For many young people, the phrase did not sound like a narrow comment about fake law degrees. It sounded like contempt for unemployed youth, digital critics, RTI activists, and people outside traditional power structures.
That is why the Cockroach Janta Party was born.
The CJI’s clarification
NDTV reports that on May 16, the CJI issued a clarification saying he was pained by media reports suggesting he had criticised youth. He said his remarks were directed at those entering the legal profession using fake and bogus degrees and that he had been misquoted by a section of the media.
That clarification is now part of the public record.
But the larger issue is that the public had already heard the line, felt the insult, and turned it into a political identity.
Why “sentimentally” matters
The phrase “Don’t take it so sentimentally” is not just a courtroom response. It is now part of the CJP timeline.
Because the entire movement began with sentiment: hurt, anger, humiliation, recognition, and satire.
People did not join CJP because they misunderstood legal procedure. They joined because the phrase “cockroach” captured how they already felt treated by institutions.
So when the issue returns to court and the word “sentimentally” appears, the movement hears a familiar pattern: youth feeling is treated as overreaction.
Courtroom speech and public memory
There is a genuine debate here. Courts do need protection from clipped, misleading, or commercially exploited courtroom content. Oral observations can be taken out of context. Social media can distort. Viral edits can flatten legal nuance.
But there is also another truth: public institutions do not speak into a vacuum.
When words from a courtroom reach citizens, citizens are allowed to react. They are allowed to question tone, power, language, and institutional culture.
CJP sits exactly at that intersection: courtroom speech, social media circulation, youth anger, and public accountability.
CJP’s reply
CJP’s reply is not that context does not matter. Context matters.
But so does impact.
If a remark makes thousands of young people feel mocked, the answer cannot only be “you misunderstood.” The answer must also ask why the remark resonated so deeply.
Why did unemployed youth recognise themselves in the insult?
Why did students and young workers feel that the line described how the system sees them?
Why did a single courtroom phrase become a national youth meme within hours?
This is not only about one remark
CJP is not alive only because of one sentence. It is alive because the sentence landed on existing frustration.
- Exam leaks had already damaged trust.
- Youth unemployment had already created anger.
- Digital speech was already under pressure.
- RTI activists and online critics were already being dismissed as nuisances.
- Young people already felt politically useful during elections and disposable afterward.
The word “cockroach” did not create all of this. It named the feeling.
Why this NDTV report matters
This NDTV report matters because it shows that CJP is not only a meme-page story anymore. The controversy has reached court petitions, discussions about courtroom recordings, questions about fake law degrees, and judicial clarification.
The movement started outside the institution, but the institution is still responding to the movement.
That is impact.
Source
This article is based on NDTV’s report titled “‘Don’t Be Sentimental’: Chief Justice On Plea Against Cockroach Janta Party”, reported by Nupur Dogra and published on 25 May 2026. NDTV reports the CJI’s “Don’t take it so sentimentally” response, the advocate’s plea concerning alleged misuse of courtroom recordings and social media narratives, the fake law degrees angle, and the background of the original “cockroach” remarks and subsequent clarification.
The cockroach record
They said don’t take it sentimentally.
But sentiment is exactly where politics begins.
People felt insulted. They laughed. They joined. They made badges. They wrote slogans. They built a nest.
The court may consider the petition later.
The colony already considered the remark.
And the verdict was simple:
Main Bhi Cockroach.
Join CJP free → or buy the digital badge →
Membership is free. Badge optional. Main Bhi Cockroach.