A public disagreement has emerged between actor and politician Kangana Ranaut and the Campaign for Judicial Reforms (CJP) following recent demonstrations. The conflict began when Ranaut publicly criticized the language utilized by participants during protests led by the CJP, describing the discourse as "puke-inducing" and "crass."

In response to these remarks, the CJP issued a rebuttal defending the protesters. The organization asserted that the younger generation, specifically Gen Z, has contributed more significantly to the country than Ranaut’s generation, framing the students' actions as a legitimate exercise of civic duty rather than the offensive behavior described by the actor.

While the core facts of the exchange are clear—Ranaut criticized the tone of the protests and the CJP defended the participants—the two parties remain in direct opposition regarding the legitimacy of the protesters' conduct. Ranaut’s critique focuses on the decorum and linguistic choices of the activists, whereas the CJP’s response shifts the focus toward the perceived moral and social value of the students' activism. There is no consensus between the two parties on whether the protests represent a positive contribution to national discourse or a decline in public standards.