There is a lot of difference and similarities between an American holding up the US constitution in the name of freedom and an Indian doing the same with the Indian constitution.

The former is libertarian in spirit and was inspired by pure, natural rights based liberal ideas. It was the closest the world had to an enforceable libertarian document which has been massively corrupted over time. A typical constitutionalist in the US argues against this corruption, in vain. Americans aren't really free anymore.

The latter is socialist in spirit and was inspired by liberal ideas already corrupted and deformed by socialist thought. It has also been absolutely demolished further by amendments, many of them with tyrranical implications. The Indian constitution, even in its original form did not really guarantee Indians' freedoms. Indians have never been free in the proper sense.

So, holding up the red book as a symbolic gesture against government corruption and tyrrany is quite ironic.