The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) has issued a call for a large-scale demonstration at Delhi’s historic Jantar Mantar protest ground on 10th October 2026. The political group has demanded the immediate resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, building public mobilization around what is being characterized as manufactured outrage concerning the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

However, in the lead-up to the planned gathering, an alarming trend has surfaced across social media platforms: multiple CJP supporters and affiliated online figures have begun urging participants—both directly and through thinly veiled suggestions—to procure authentic-looking police uniforms via internet retailers in order to pose as on-duty Delhi Police personnel.

Among the prominent voices steering this online activity is well-known anti-BJP commentator Ramit Verma, who operates the widely followed @thepeeinghuman handle on X. Observers have pointed out his reliance on reverse psychology, publicly discouraging an act while ensuring the exact method and procurement avenues are amplified to his audience. Posting under the handle “Official PeeingHuman”, he stated: “REQUESTING all protesters to NOT buy this and show up at the protest wearing it, please DO NOT. Thanks. Also please report this link so that no one can use it.” Alongside this message, the administrator of the pro-AAP social channel shared an active purchase link leading directly to a commercial e-commerce site named “Trendzmy,” which retails standard police attire and associated accessories.

This is not the first instance where Ramit Verma’s public commentary has faced substantial scrutiny and pushback. In 2020, Verma drew sharp criticism after putting out unsubstantiated claims alleging that political workers belonging to the BJP and RSS were responsible for harassing female students at Gargi College under the University of Delhi. Those allegations were directly contradicted when the then Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Atul Thakur informed journalist Swati Goel Sharma that detailed official inquiries found no political affiliation whatsoever among the individuals implicated in the Gargi College harassment case. Later, in February 2025, Verma was invited to participate in an overseas panel organized by Joyojeet Pal, an Associate Professor at the University of Michigan whose research forums have frequently drawn controversy for assembling hostile, anti-India elements under a single platform.

More recently, during the CJP’s organized “Chalo Sansad” protest in July 2026, the commentator claimed that he was physically assaulted by security personnel. According to Verma's own public recounting of the incident, after taking an initial blow from a police officer, he verbally dared the personnel to strike him once more; instead of stepping back, the officer complied with his explicit request and struck him again.

The call for donning official uniforms has gained further momentum among ordinary party sympathizers. On 6th October 2026, an individual named Faizan Ahmed posted on X addressing the CJP and its primary founder, Abhijeet Dipke, advocating that demonstrators acquire uniforms without identification tags so they could blend directly into the ranks of the deployment. Ahmed wrote: “Why should goons have all the fun @abhijeet_dipke @CJP_for_India you need to buy police uniforms without name plate. let’s confuse the confuse police walo k beech khud bhi police bano,” openly suggesting that agitators turn into unidentifiable "police among the police."

Echoing this tactic, another CJP backer posted: “All protestors should wear police uniforms without name tags and confuse the fuck out of Delhi Police. Pakde gaye toh bolna baju main Singham 6 ki shooting chal rahi hai.”

These coordinated efforts to bypass security lines by masquerading as law enforcement follow an established pattern seen at earlier rallies, where several CJP activists and digital influencers operated under the guise of ‘independent journalists.’ Carrying fabricated or unaccredited press credentials, these individuals deliberately created chaos, leveled severe allegations against ground personnel, and used media tags as shields to evade lawful detention.

Security analysts point out that unauthorized possession and use of official uniforms extends far beyond merely sidestepping police barricades or avoiding arrest. There is deep apprehension that agitators masquerading in police gear might deliberately commit acts of vandalism or violence, thereby framing the Delhi Police force to incite broader public unrest. A comparable dynamic played out during the CJP’s July agitation, where party supporters initiated confrontations by throwing stones and engaging in street violence; when security units responded to restore order, coordinated media narratives immediately flipped the incident to depict standard crowd-control measures as unprovoked brutality against innocent students. Following the use of pseudo-journalists and fabricated CCTV clips alleging misconduct, the strategy appears to have escalated to demonstrators showing up on 10th October in commercially sourced official uniforms.

What the Law Outlines Regarding Unauthorized Use of Police Uniforms

Under the Indian legal framework, the possession, wearing, and operational use of police attire are strictly restricted to authorized state personnel.

Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, deliberate impersonation of an official carries stringent penalties. Specifically, Section 204 of the BNS treats the intentional impersonation of a public servant as a serious, cognizable, and non-bailable offense. The statutory provision reads:

“Whoever pretends to hold any particular office as a public servant, knowing that he does not hold such office or falsely personates any other person holding such office, and in such assumed character does or attempts to do any act under colour of such office, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than six months but may extend to three years and with fine,”

Complementing this, Section 205 of the BNS addresses the specific act of wearing garments or carrying identifiable tokens associated with public servants with deceptive intent. Anyone who is not a member of the designated force but dons resembling clothing or displays symbols to lead observers to believe they belong to that official cadre faces criminal prosecution. Under this section, the act is classified as a cognizable and bailable offense, which specifies:

“Whoever, not belonging to a certain class of public servants, wears any garb or carries any token resembling any garb or token used by that class of public servants, with the intention that it may be believed, or with the knowledge that it is likely to be believed, that he belongs to that class of public servants, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both,”

Beyond the provisions of the penal code, the Police Act of 1861, read in conjunction with statutory service guidelines such as the Indian Police Service (Uniform) Rules, explicitly reserves official gear, rank badges, crests, and departmental insignia solely for active, verified personnel entitled to display them while executing official duties or complying with force regulations.

Very narrow statutory exemptions exist—limited strictly to sanctioned ceremonial functions, retired veterans, or specialized training exercises possessing written clearance. In the creative and entertainment industries—such as television productions, theater, and cinema—production houses must secure prior formal permissions and clearances from competent local administrative and police authorities before utilizing replica costumes. Outside of these clear exceptions, private citizens wearing uniforms to mislead crowds, bypass administrative checkpoints, direct pedestrian movement, or unlawfully exercise state authority are committing actionable offenses. Depending on the actions taken while wearing the attire, offenders remain liable for additional criminal charges, including criminal cheating, physical assault, and unlawful obstruction of public servants executing their duties.

E-Commerce Portals Retailing Police and Paramilitary Gear

The widespread and largely unmonitored retail of authentic law enforcement gear on commercial internet portals has raised immediate security concerns. Platforms such as Trendzmy, Amazon, Uniformer, and DressCode Clothing have listed standard Indian police garments, tactical gear, and accessories directly for consumer purchase.

While Indian law does not currently impose a blanket, universal criminal prohibition on the commercial manufacturing or sale of fabric uniforms comparable to the explicit criminal ban on unauthorized wear, municipal administrations hold broad authority to regulate and restrict these transactions. To prevent public disorder and criminal exploitation, executive magistrates frequently invoke Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), issuing preventive orders that direct commercial actors to abstain from unrestricted sales. In several jurisdictions, such as Chandigarh, district authorities have repeatedly enacted formal bans on the open sale of military and police uniforms, logos, rank badges, and insignias unless the prospective buyer presents verified departmental credentials, requiring merchants to log and maintain official purchase registers.

Despite such local enforcement measures, portals like DressCode Clothing continue to list attire for defense forces, military wings, and the National Cadet Corps (NCC). Prior criminal investigations across various states have uncovered multiple cases where criminal syndicates and con artists procured complete tactical uniforms from retail websites to impersonate high-ranking officers and defraud citizens.

Currently, an array of official equipment—spanning beret caps, heavy winter service coats, tactical duty belts, regulation leather footwear, socks, and official department badges—remains readily purchasable on the open web. These supply channels present obvious risks of misuse by criminal networks and political agitators aiming to infiltrate security perimeters. Given the upcoming gathering at Jantar Mantar and explicit calls to disrupt administrative operations, security agencies face an urgent imperative to treat the unrestricted online retail of law enforcement uniforms as a primary public order and national security vulnerability requiring swift, coordinated intervention.