Published Oct 29, 2026 | 7:00 AM ⚊ Updated Oct 29, 2026 | 7:00 AM
CJP activists alleged scrutiny by intelligence agencies, including calls from the police ahead of protests.
Synopsis: Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) activists in Keralam have alleged that intelligence agencies photographed protesters, collected their personal details, tracked their movements and contacted students’ parents over their participation in demonstrations. While the Kerala Police claimed that monitoring protests was routine intelligence work aimed at preventing law-and-order problems, CJP leaders said the scrutiny has left activists wary of organising protests.
Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) activists in Keralam, a state governed by the Congress-led UDF, have alleged that their participation in demonstrations was being closely monitored, their personal details collected, and their families contacted by both state and central intelligence agencies.
The activists claimed that students who attended protests faced particular scrutiny, with some allegedly receiving calls at home and being warned against participating in demonstrations.
The Kerala Police denied allegations of snooping and maintained that keeping track of protests and gathering information about participants were routine functions of its specialised wings.
CJP leaders contended that the scrutiny went beyond ordinary policing, pointing to what they described as targeted monitoring by central intelligence agencies following the protests against Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) Gyanesh Kumar in Thiruvananthapuram and Delhi.
They also stated that constant monitoring has made them wary of organising protests and communicating within their own groups. This raises an important question: when does intelligence gathering in the name of public order cross the line into surveillance, discouraging people from exercising their democratic right?
CJP activists alleged scrutiny by intelligence agencies, including calls from the police ahead of protests, questions about participants, photographing activists and making phone calls to parents.
Speaking to South First, Sanoop Dev, CJP Keralam coordinator, said he regularly received calls from the police over protests organised in the state and in Delhi.
He said the Kannur Special Branch contacted him a day before an event in the district, in support of the Jantar Mantar protest and asked him about the participants. He clarified that the event was organised by the people’s collective ‘Vote for Democracy’ and not the CJP.
Sanoop also said two cases had been registered against him over participation in different protests. The Delhi Police registered a case against him during the first CJP-led protest at Jantar Mantar against the NEET-UG paper leak, while the Kochi City Police registered another case over a solidarity protest in Kochi, citing a lack of permission despite organisers having sought approval.
Firoz Khan, CJP’s South India coordinator, said police regularly sought participant details ahead of national meetings. However, the organisation began to suspect targeted surveillance after the Lok Bhavan march in Thiruvananthapuram, he said.
According to Firoz, nearly 600 people from various political parties took part in the march, but central agency officials focused on around 30 CJP activists, photographing them and collecting their phone numbers, including those of students and women. He alleged that parents of student participants were later contacted and asked not to allow their children to attend such events.
Firoz said officials identifying themselves as members of central intelligence agencies had contacted activists, while the organisation remained unclear about any possible involvement of state agencies.
He alleged that during the Lok Bhavan march, personnel in civil dress repeatedly asked CJP activists if they planned to travel to Delhi.
Describing the experience as a form of “silent torture,” Firoz said students who regularly attended protests were particularly vulnerable to scrutiny.
He cited the cases of Charles and Maheen, two students from Alappuzha who attended the CJP-led protests against CEC Gyanesh Kumar at Jantar Mantar.
According to Firoz, the students told CJP that police personnel were frequently seen near their homes, making it difficult for them to step outside without feeling watched. He also alleged that central intelligence officials joined CJP’s WhatsApp groups posing as students.
The suspected presence of officials in these groups, he said, had made activists increasingly cautious about sharing information and discussing plans internally.
Also Read: Bruised, short of funds, CJP Keralam activists continue to hold fort in Delhi
Police officials stated that collecting information on protests and demonstrations was part of the routine work of the Kerala Police’s Special Branch and State Intelligence wing, which monitored developments that could have a bearing on public order and security.
Intelligence personnel gathered details about protest calls, the organisations behind them, key organisers, expected turnout and proposed routes to help the police assess possible law-and-order problems and plan deployments.
“The collection of information on protests is part of our routine duty. It doesn’t matter if its CJP or BJP. We even collect information on organizations affiliated to the ruling party whenever they give a protest call. We assess the nature of the agitation, the organisations involved, the expected turnout and the possibility of law-and-order issues. The inputs help the police make the necessary security arrangements,” a Special Branch officer told South First.
The District Special Branch (DSB) and State Special Branch (SSB) are key components of this intelligence network. The former functioned under District Police Chiefs, while the latter operated under the state police intelligence set-up.
Their remit covered political, communal, labour and other social movements, including agitations that could affect public peace. The Kerala Police Act, 2011, provided the legal framework for police functions relating to public order and security.
Operational instructions also required intelligence units to collect, assess and share information that supported policing and the maintenance of state security.
“During demonstrations, officers may document crowd movements, speeches and incidents through photographs, videos and field reports. Such records can help establish what happened at a protest and may be relevant to subsequent investigations or court proceedings. Background checks on key organisers may also be undertaken when there are specific law-and-order concerns, such as threats of violence, obstruction or violations of prohibitory orders,” added the officer.
Another top official told South First that the state police had no clear picture of the intelligence-gathering activities of central agencies such as the Intelligence Bureau (IB).
“The state police’s routine intelligence work on demonstrations does not, by itself, establish that every protester or political leader is under surveillance. While the IB may be tracking prominent political figures or key protest leaders as part of its own assessment, state police officers do not necessarily know what those agencies are monitoring or what information they are collecting,” the official said.
(Edited by Fayisa CA)
