The Uttarakhand High Court has declined to quash a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against gym owner ‘Mohammad’ Deepak Kumar, in connection with a confrontation involving right-wing activists. Instead, the court issued a gag order restraining him from posting messages or videos about the incident on social media platforms on the issue to ensure an unimpeded police investigation.
The matter stems from an incident on 26 January in which Kumar intervened when some right-wing activists allegedly harassed an elderly Muslim shopkeeper, demanding he remove the word “Baba” from his shop name because of its Hindu religious connotation. The confrontation took place in front of Kumar’s gym. When questioned about his own name, Kumar replied that he was “Mohammad” Deepak.
Cross-FIRs have since been registered by both sides after the incident. A separate incident on 31 January has also been noted as requiring thorough scrutiny.
Kumar approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him on the complaint of the activists, along with police protection and a departmental inquiry into officers whom he alleged had acted with bias. His counsel, Advocate Navnish Negi, argued that Kumar had merely tried to de-escalate a tense situation, that threats had been made against him, and that the video of the event had not been publicised by his client.
Dismissing the plea to quash the FIR, Justice Rakesh Thapliyal observed that Kumar’s petition appeared to be an attempt to sensationalise the issue and interfere with the ongoing investigation. The court noted the State’s submission that Deepak Kumar had not been cooperating with investigators and had instead remained active on social media.
“The petitioner has a right to challenge FIR, but as pointed out by the State, as all offences carry less than seven year sentence, thus investigating agency is under legal obligation to follow Supreme Court guidelines,” the judge remarked. The court directed the police to adhere to the Arnesh Kumar guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for cases involving offences punishable with up to seven years’ imprisonment.
In a firm direction, Justice Thapliyal imposed a gag order against Deepak Kumar, stating, “I am stopping you from making any statement on social media. It is my strict direction… The petitioners are directed to cooperate with the investigation and not to indulge unnecessarily on social media platforms so that investigation is not affected.” He added that Kumar, “being a citizen of India… has to cooperate with investigation by hoping and trust that investigation will be conducted in fair and transparent manner.”
The court also rejected Kumar’s request for police protection, noting there was no perceived threat according to the State, and dismissed the prayer for a departmental inquiry against police officers as “wholly unwarranted”. The court yesterday had slammed him for seeking protection despite being the accused in the case. The court remarked that it was a tactic to put pressure on police, and that he was trying to sensationalise the case.
In today’s order, the court the petitioner is under investigation and in such circumstances, he cannot pray for police protection. The court said, “There is no question of creating a doubt on the investigating agency. He has to hope and trust that his life will be protected. Still, he can approach the competent officer.”
The court further dismissed Kumar’s plea for departmental inquiry against certain cops, calling it “wholly unwarranted.” The court noted, “Police officers are busy in investigation of FIRs. This relief will affect the ongoing investigation and affect the morale of the investigating agency.”
The court recorded the State’s assurance of a fair and transparent probe into both the 26 January and 31 January incidents and confirmed that two FIRs had already been registered on Kumar’s complaint.
Describing the original events as “really an unfortunate incident”, the judge expressed confidence that the police would maintain law and order and conduct the investigation properly. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of with the above directions.
