The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) on Tuesday, 21 July removed Vijeta Dahiya from his post as party spokesperson after videos allegedly showing him eating a burger went viral during the outfit's march to Parliament — a demonstration that saw protesters, mostly students and youngsters, face alleged police violence in New Delhi. The dismissal came as the CJP-led march drew sharp attention over reported police brutality against agitators.

The Party's Statement

Posting on its official X handle, the Abhijeet Dipke-led CJP announced that Dahiya was being “relieved of all his official duties.” The party said in its post: “We strongly condemn the deeply insensitive actions of our spokesperson Vijeta Dahiya, whose videos surfaced while peaceful protestors and our team were facing brutal police violence. Such conduct is unacceptable, shows a complete lack of judgment, and is wholly inconsistent with the values and principles of our movement.”

The statement concluded: “In response, we are removing Vijeta Dahiya as spokesperson of the Cockroach Janta Party and relieving him of all the official duties.”

Dahiya's Defiant Response

Dahiya did not go quietly. In a video posted on Tuesday, he rejected the criticism outright. “Why did I eat a burger? This is a big issue today. So, why does any human eat a burger? Either they are hungry, or they feel like eating a burger. That’s it,” he said.

The former CJP spokesperson went further, questioning the accountability protesters held him to: “Anyways, you guys hold me so accountable… I mean, is being a protester a job? Did you elect me to this position? Go hold the government accountable!” He added: “Whatever I am doing, I am doing it for the country, doing it by my own choice, and I am not accountable to anyone. And I will eat a burger.”

Police Action Under Scrutiny

The backdrop to the internal CJP dispute is a broader controversy over Delhi Police conduct during the march on Monday, 20 July. According to the CJP, several protesters were lathi-charged and tear-gassed, with some left badly injured and bleeding. The party alleged the police response constituted “brutal police violence” against what it described as a peaceful demonstration.

Delhi Police, however, countered that the protesters displayed “unruly, aggressive and violent behaviour,” offering a sharply different account of events on the ground. The competing narratives have yet to be independently verified.

Context and What Comes Next

Notably, the viral clips of Dahiya emerged at a particularly sensitive moment — when images and videos of injured young protesters were circulating widely online. Critics argued that the optics of a party official eating during an allegedly violent crackdown were politically damaging, regardless of the circumstances. The CJP's swift action suggests the leadership was acutely aware of the reputational stakes.

With Dahiya's removal formalised and his public rebuttals drawing fresh attention, the episode is likely to extend the controversy around both the CJP's internal discipline and the broader questions surrounding the police response to the Parliament march.