If I am not mistaken, Indian people came to Nepal to protest the dethroning of the kingship in Nepal. There are some interest groups in India who want to protect the King.

Based on the debate and discussion, I understand that most of the people are worried about that India would take over Nepal or Nepal will lose its identity without the King. 

I believe none of the above doubts have ground to support. The end of the monarchy is not as a result of the whim of GPK, MKN or Prachand nor is at the will of India. As we have seen, none of them is charismatic leader either. But this is the result of time, situation and circumstances. If they were not in the helm of the party leadership, someone else like A or B or C would take the responsibility to lead the time ( I mean aspiration of people). Therefore, we have nothing to worry about. But what we should worry about is Nepal should not remain in status quo. Should we protect the king for ages in the pretext that India would take over Nepal or Nepal would lose its identity? But for how long................ a year........... a decade............ 25 years........ 50 years.......... a century?? When do we prepare our so-called leadership to protect the country in the shadow of monarchy? Do we have any answer?  If monarchy should go soonar or later, then why not now itself? Why should we always wait for the benefit of others? How long we are going to display our hollow indentity hiding our empty stomach and bear body?