Viral videos circulating on social media show Supreme Court advocate Prashant Bhushan calling for a “street revolution” and referring to the possibility of “Khoon kharaba” or bloodshed to regain political power. The remarks, made during an X Spaces discussion on Sunday night, 11th October, have sparked controversy amid the ongoing Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) demonstrations in Delhi. Bhushan said that a revolution was the only way to get back power and added that it would involve “bahut khoon kharaba” (considerable bloodshed).
‘There will be bloodshed’ | | Prashant Bhushan talks of ‘revolution’ to topple Government, BJP tweets video of conversation, WATCH Tune in – https://t.co/InUQKpLUC9 #PrashantBhushan #Congress #BJP #India #NationFirst #RepublicWorld https://t.co/oFBUMya0ih
— Republic (@republic) October 12, 2026
The discussion was hosted by the propaganda X handle Dr Nimo Yadav 2.0 and also featured comedian Kunal Kamra, who questioned Bhushan about a remark attributed to former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru concerning lawyers and the Constitution. Bhushan’s response, particularly his reference to bloodshed in the context of a political revolution, has drawn criticism.
Today is an Important Day Prashant Bhushan is giving open call for Violence and Bloodbath Supreme Court Central Govt Delhi Police All the above are targets today https://t.co/YjbhxPo2ya
— The Jaipur Dialogues (@JaipurDialogues) October 11, 2026
Prashant Bhushan says revolution is the only way to regain power
During the conversation in viral videos, Kamra asked Bhushan how he viewed Nehru’s remark that if the Constitution of India fell into the hands of lawyers, the country would be destroyed. Bhushan responded by arguing that a revolution was the only way to regain political power.
“The only way to get back power is revolution,” Bhushan said. He continued in Hindi, “Problem ye hai na ki dekho, aur hamare paas options kya hain? Options toh yehi hain ki bhai hum revolution ke through kuch kara lein. Ab us revolution mein toh bahut khoon kharaba hoega.”
His statements have since drawn widespread criticism for promoting civil unrest and violent overthrow during the ongoing demonstrations in the National Capital demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
BJP condemns Bhushan’s remarks on bloodshed
BJP National Spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari condemned Prashant Bhushan’s remarks and accused the Congress ecosystem of promoting political instability and violence. Bhandari shared the video of Bhushan’s comments on his X account, questioning the call for a “street revolution” and its reference to bloodshed.
Prashant Bhushan, Supreme Court advocate who is marching with Rahul Gandhi & part of Congress ecosystem says-" What option we have except Street Revolution. Bloodshed can also happen" Congress ecosystem is a big threat to Indian Democracy! People of India are fighting these out of power Anarchist! Congress ecosystem is exploring violence for regime change!
— Pradeep Bhandari(प्रदीप भंडारी)🇮🇳 (@pradip103) October 12, 2026
In his post, Bhandari wrote, “Prashant Bhushan, Supreme Court advocate who is marching with Rahul Gandhi & part of Congress ecosystem says-” What option we have except Street Revolution. Bloodshed can also happen” Congress ecosystem is a big threat to Indian Democracy! People of India are fighting these out of power Anarchist! Congress ecosystem is exploring violence for regime change!”
Jangpura meeting and linked to the anti-Hindu Delhi riots
This is not the first time Prashant Bhushan’s name has been linked to major controversies and civil disruptions.
Previously, the former AAP leader, has also been involved in anti-Hindu Delhi riots. On 8th December, 2019, a secretive meeting was held in a basement in Jangpura involving key accused of Delhi riots like Yogendra Yadav, Sharjeel Imam, and Umar Khalid to hatch a plan for implementing disruptive ‘Chakka Jams’. According to chargesheets filed by the Delhi Police, this meeting served as the breeding ground where the seeds of the subsequent violence were sown.
Crucially, records and communications presented to the Supreme Court reveal that the exact address of this meeting, 6/6 Jangpura Extension, is the registered office address of Prashant Bhushan himself.
His office is a hub for anti-India Propaganda
Beyond the Delhi riots conspiracy, the basement office at 6/6 Jangpura has often served as a launchpad for contentious anti-India propaganda. It has housed organisations like the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Judicial Reform (CJAR), which was fined ₹25,00,000 by the Supreme Court in 2017 for filing a frivolous petition falsely accusing a judge of accepting bribes. CJAR was also at the forefront of running propaganda against CJI Dipak Mishra and furthering the narrative of the 4 judges who had held a press conference against the CJI at the time.
Read: CJAR’s press release on today’s press conference by 4 seniormost judges of SC about the abuse of power of master of roster by CJI.We have also highlighted some of the politically sensitive cases where such power has been egregiously abused by the CJI https://t.co/TM6upzxoxe
— Prashant Bhushan (@pbhushan1) January 12, 2018
Furthermore, the National Alliance for People’s Movements (NAPM), founded by Medha Patkar, who later faced serious fraud and embezzlement charges involving tribal education funds, has also operated out of the same office space. An FIR was lodged in Madhya Pradesh’s Barwani against Medha Patkar and 11 others in this regard. In the FIR, Pritam Raj, the complainant, accused Patkar of embezzling more than Rs 13 crore on the pretext of funding educational opportunities for tribal children. The complaint also revealed that Patkar had misappropriated funds since she did not have accounts for all of the donations collected for the education of the tribal poor between 2007 and 2022.
He had been vocal for illegal Rohingya immigrants
Beyond these long-standing controversies, SC advocate and an ardent supporter of Umar Khalid, Prashant Bhushan has also been involved in a relentless campaign against the Election Commission of India. His recent track record shows continued alignment with divisive causes. His name surfaced prominently in pro-Hidma protests held in the national capital to support a slain Naxalite. Furthermore, he has been a vocal advocate for illegal Rohingya immigrants, going as far as publicly attacking Chief Justice Surya Kant for allegedly failing to protect their interests. These recurring episodes paint a consistent pattern of contentious activism that continually pushes the boundaries of legal and public discourse in India.
Prashant Bhushan’s track record of spreading fake news and unverified claims
Apart from his radical political statements and controversial activism, Prashant Bhushan has a well-documented history of pushing misinformation, fake news, and unverified data on social media to score political points.
In a notable instance last year, the leftist activist shared a post on X claiming that Dev Bhumi Uttarakhand University would award 50 internal marks to students for attending Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s rally. He posted a ‘notice’ from the university claiming that B.Tech CSE and BCA second-year students were mandated to attend an event at FRI where an interaction with the Prime Minister would take place. The fabricated notice stated that attendance would count under the Bharatiya Gyan Parampara (Indian Knowledge System) course.
However, Dev Bhumi Uttarakhand University quickly clarified via Facebook and official notifications that the circulating document was entirely fake, noting that it lacked official signatures, reference numbers, or proper authorisation. PIB Fact Check also confirmed that the notice shared by Bhushan was a fabrication.
A letter allegedly issued by Devbhoomi Uttarakhand University is being circulated on social media, claiming that students’ attendance at Prime Minister @narendramodi’s programme has been made mandatory and that internal examination marks will be given for it. #PIBFactCheck ❌ This letter is #Fake. No such order has been issued by the university. ▶️ Read here -: https://t.co/dX8IRLdpaH ✅ Please do not fall for such misinformation. Rely only on information obtained from authentic and verified sources.
— PIB Fact Check (@PIBFactCheck) November 8, 2025
Caught spreading fake news during Manipur unrest
In 2023, Bhushan shared a video of a father-daughter duo singing an old Bollywood melody, falsely claiming that they were from Manipur and belonged to two conflicting communities, one Kuki and the other Meitei, to capitalise on the ethnic unrest. Leftist handles and Congress supporters amplified the post.
The narrative collapsed when the singer in the video, Shekinah Mukhiya, a professional singer from Dehradun, Uttarakhand, posted a clarification on Facebook confirming that she was singing with her father, Vikas Mukhiya, and that they had no association whatsoever with Manipur or its communities. While other users deleted their tweets or acknowledged the error, Bhushan failed to retract his false claims, and the post remained active on his profile.
Similarly, in 2018, Bhushan was caught spreading unverified claims regarding PNB scam accused Mehul Choksi’s Antiguan citizenship. Citing a left-leaning portal, Scroll, Bhushan claimed that Choksi became an Antiguan citizen after Prime Minister Modi met the Antiguan President in April of that year. In reality, public records and reports confirmed that Choksi had already obtained Antiguan citizenship through an investment program in November 2017, months before the PNB scam surfaced or Interpol issued a red corner notice.
Attacked PM Modi with fake report
In another instance, professional fake news peddler, Prashant Bhushan shared a sensational “news report” from a non-existent or fictitious publication called “Dainik Ujala” on the front page, attacking PM Modi and Reliance Jio. The fake report claimed Jio had betrayed India by purchasing 30 crore cheap phones from China instead of manufacturing locally, committing tax fraud, and posing national security risks. Fact-checks revealed that the website URL provided was non-existent and that Jio phones were actually manufactured in Taiwan, a country with longstanding geopolitical conflicts with China, exposing the narrative as a politically motivated WhatsApp forward.
Bhushan has also previously attempted to link Narendra Modi to corporate bribery scandals, such as the Sahara and Birla case, where the Supreme Court threw out his submitted documents, noting that anyone could manufacture such proofs. He also blamed the “culture of Hindutva” for a gruesome molestation case before it was established that the crime was committed by Muslim youths.
Manipulation attempt during the Bihar SIR proceedings
Continuing his pattern of presenting unverified material, Prashant Bhushan faced sharp censure from the Supreme Court during hearings on the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls. The apex court expressed strong displeasure with the senior advocate for submitting an affidavit from a petitioner that contained false information without proper verification.
The incident occurred before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi. The affidavit, filed by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and represented by Bhushan, claimed that a specific individual’s name present in the draft electoral roll had been illegally deleted from the final list. However, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing the Election Commission of India (ECI), strongly refuted the claim, proving that the person was never included in the draft list because the mandatory enumeration form was never submitted.
Labelling the submission a “false affidavit” that amounted to perjury, ECI counsel urged the court to hold the organisation accountable. Justice Surya Kant directly reprimanded Bhushan, stating, “The person should have disclosed correct information… we do not appreciate this.” Justice Bagchi echoed these concerns, emphasising the legal responsibility of tendering verified documents across the bar.
Although Bhushan shamelessly defended his actions by claiming the affidavit came from a “responsible person,” Justice Bagchi remained deeply sceptical, stating, “After our experience with this affidavit, we don’t know how authentic the others will be.”
Bhushan’s latest remarks on revolution and bloodshed have now added another point of controversy to his public record. While he spoke about the open revolution as a means of regaining political power, the reference to bloodshed is likely to draw scrutiny given the sensitive political climate and the ongoing demonstrations in Delhi.
