People are out on the streets – in Delhi, in Mumbai, in Shantiniketan, and in Jaipur. They are seething with a searing anger. It is an anger directed at a regime swollen with its own hubris. The grotesque sight of the state bouncers swathing a frail, fasting Sonam Wangchuk in white sheets, only to make him disappear from Jantar Mantar, struck a deep nerve in them. In that moment, citizens witnessed the unvarnished, brute power of an arrogant state descending upon the defenceless body of an individual who was only punishing himself – all while pleading with the state to own the structural ruin of our educational system. They watched his body waste away day by day; they endured the chilling, cruel silence of the state; and finally, they witnessed his abduction. Before their very eyes, power had bared its fangs.Yet this was not merely the humiliation of Sonam Wangchuk; the people experienced it as a direct assault upon themselves. It jolted them out of a long slumber. Or perhaps the storm that had been quietly gathering in their hearts for years finally burst open.Now, they no longer care whether the government sends a representative to negotiate with them. They are marching, raising their voices, and asserting through their presence that they exist – that they matter.Sonam Wangchuk ought to have recognised that the moment had surpassed him. He was no longer the central issue. The people were actively reclaiming their lost rights, their stolen autonomy. His duty was to offer them his gratitude for stepping into the public square, for breaking their silence, and then to bring his fast to an end. But he remains convinced that he is the indispensable axis around which this struggle turns.His wife, Geetanjali Angmo, announced a condition last night for him to break his fast: political leaders must present themselves to him and guarantee that education will be debated in the ongoing session of Parliament.She left the phrase “political leaders” ambiguous and undefined. Until yesterday, the moral appeal was addressed squarely to the government. Whence comes this sudden shift in target? When she demands the presence of political leaders, does she include the figures of the Bharatiya Janata Party? Or is she addressing herself solely to the opposition? Would the arrival of a few minor allies of the ruling coalition satisfy the demand? Would a solitary figure or two suffice? And if they fail to appear, are we to be treated, once again, to that tired, sanctimonious lament that the entire political class is equally responsible for the decay of Indian education?Later, we saw the statement issued by Wangchuk himself. He has asked political parties to visit him and offer a pledge that they will raise the issue of education in this parliamentary session.WHEN WILL I END THE FAST….!Not withstanding my health my fast continues till after the Sansad Chalo March, and will be broken only under the following circumstances… pic.twitter.com/kaOGx2Nk4T— Sonam Wangchuk (@Wangchuk66) July 20, 2026One must say this plainly: this is a deeply flawed, almost bizarre demand. By attaching the end of his fast to such a condition, Wangchuk has diminished both the moral weight of his own act and the gravity of the cause he originally set out to champion.It is worth remembering that when he made this demand, three young students continued their hunger strike at Jantar Mantar. They had been fasting for over 22 days, demanding the resignation of the education minister – a fast they explicitly declared in solidarity with Wangchuk. Do they endorse this new, arbitrary condition? Were they even consulted before it was broadcast to the world? Or is Wangchuk now to be understood as a figure existing above the ordinary obligations of democratic consultation and collective decision-making?Now that they have ended their fast, they proved to be wiser than Wangchuk.The AISA student activists who are on a hunger strike for the last 22 days. Photo: By special arrangementAnd what of Abhijeet Dipke? He sat on an indefinite hunger strike out of pure outrage at the state’s treatment of Wangchuk. Is he expected to fold his fast the moment the master does so? Why did Wangchuk forget him while announcing his conditions?Are those who admire Wangchuk now expected to urge opposition leaders to queue outside his hospital room, pleading with him to save his precious life by offering parliamentary guarantees? Should they decline to participate in this spectacle, will they be branded insensitive? Will political parties – whose irrelevance is so routinely proclaimed by civil society – now find themselves competing to fulfil his ultimatum, as recent declarations from the Trinamool Congress already hint?When Wangchuk began his fast, his demand was precise and unambiguous: the education minister, Dharmendra Pradhan, must resign. He maintained that his struggle was about enforcing accountability for the systemic collapse of Indian education, and that the Minister’s resignation was the non-negotiable first step. This was also the explicit demand of the Cockroach Janata Party. Wangchuk remained steadfast: no resignation, no end to the fast.Fifteen days into his fast, a petition was filed in the Delhi high court by a well-wisher concerned over his deteriorating health, prompting the court to direct the government to monitor his medical condition. Soon after, reports of his failing body began to circulate. Almost the entire opposition expressed solidarity, visited Jantar Mantar, and pleaded with him to break his fast. They pointed out what was obvious to any keen observer of power: an authoritarian regime so callous would neither sacrifice its minister nor engage in sincere dialogue. He ought not to risk his life waiting for a moral epiphany from a regime incapable of remorse.The Congress party noted that it had long been raising these very questions – that the crisis was not confined to a single examination or an isolated minister, but was deeply structural. It was part of a larger battle against authoritarianism, and for the sake of that broader struggle, they appealed to him to preserve his life and strength.A Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) supporter holds a portrait of activist Sonam Wangchuk during a protest demanding Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan’s resignation over alleged irregularities in the NEET examination, at the Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, Sunday, July 19, 2026. Photo: PTI.Wangchuk’s response was one of visible irritation. Rather than taking their counsel to end his fast, he admonished them, declaring that everyone ought to be marching against the government. A march to Parliament on July 20 was accordingly called to demand systemic accountability.Before that day could arrive, however, the Delhi Police – using the high court’s medical directives as a convenient shield – forcibly removed Wangchuk from Jantar Mantar and interned him in Safdarjung Hospital. Refusing to engage politically with a political protest, the state resorted to raw bureaucratic coercion.The consequences have been striking, and entirely beyond what the regime had bargained for. For 20 days, while Wangchuk fasted, Jantar Mantar remained largely quiet. But the moment he was forcibly bundled away, thousands of young and old citizens descended upon the site. Across the country, spontaneous protests erupted against the high-handedness of the state. Thousands spent the night in the open at Jantar Mantar, physically guarding the space against further police action. Many traveled from distant towns, enduring exhausting journeys simply to register their moral presence.We must understand what this public response signifies. The movement has already transcended the immediate issue of educational reform. What has aroused the public conscience is something far more fundamental: the raw, unbridled arrogance of power in a nominal democracy. It is a rebellion against the systemic humiliation of the citizen. People have taken to the streets because they sense that this government regards them not as citizens, but as mere subjects. They may not articulate it in formal academic terms, but what they are attempting to reclaim is the most elementary democratic right – the right to speak, to dissent, and to force power to give an account of itself.Security personnel stand guard near Jantar Mantar ahead of Cockroach Janata Party’s (CJP) protest march, in New Delhi, Monday, July 20, 2026. Photo: PTI.In that vital sense, the movement has grown vastly larger than Sonam Wangchuk himself. It is no longer a nervous vigil over an individual’s failing health; it has transformed into a profound assertion of popular sovereignty. Even those who had failed to notice the state quietly assuming the posture of an absolute master have suddenly awakened.The government has committed a grave political blunder. The image that will endure in the collective memory is not that of a fragile activist being escorted for medical care, but of an unarmed citizen surrounded, crushed, and dragged away by the coercive arm of the state. In that single moment, the state succeeded in removing Wangchuk from public view and made visible its cruelty.Sonam Wangchuk ought to recognise the historical weight of this moment. It is no longer about his personal moral crusade. It belongs to a people who have, at long last, begun to find their own collective voice. He should thank them for this awakening and end his fast.Instead, by placing himself above political institutions and demanding that parties bow before his moral authority to secure his survival, he risks appearing less like a democratic protester and more like a self-styled Mahatma. This does not elevate his stature; it exposes a pathetic vanity.At this crucial juncture, Wangchuk may be diminishing his own moral height. The people, however, have risen to meet the demands of history. And it is precisely in their rise that hope lives.Apoorvanand teaches at Delhi University.