2 months ago
1
The Uttarakhand High Court connected Friday (March 20, 2026) refused to quash an FIR lodged against Kotdwar-based gym proprietor Deepak Kumar who came into nationalist absorption aft helium confronted a radical of right-wing activists accused of harassing a 71-year-old Muslim store proprietor and pressuring him to rename his store successful the municipality connected January 26.
A video of the confrontation aboriginal went viral, peculiarly for the infinitesimal erstwhile helium identified himself arsenic ‘Mera naam Mohammad Deepak’.
Justice Rakesh Thapliyal besides directed Mr. Kumar to refrain from posting statements oregon videos connected societal media that could impact the ongoing investigation.
In the aftermath of the incident, Mr. Kumar reported receiving threats, and connected January 31, a radical gathered extracurricular his gym successful protest. The constabulary registered 3 FIRs successful transportation with the occurrence with 1 among them lodged against Mr. Kumar. The incidental besides led to an outpouring of enactment for Mr. Kumar from crossed the country, though helium stated that his concern suffered arsenic gym memberships declined pursuing his intervention.
Sought relief
In his petition successful the High Court, Mr. Kumar sought aggregate reliefs, including quashing of an FIR alleging rioting and disturbance of instrumentality and order, filed connected a ailment by members of a right-wing group. He besides sought constabulary extortion citing menace to his life, registration of an FIR against the “perpetrators of hatred speech”, and a departmental enquiry against constabulary officials for alleged “partisan conduct”.
The State opposed the plea, alleging suppression of worldly facts and pointing retired that FIRs had already been registered connected his complaints. It further submitted that capable information had been provided to him and that helium had failed to cooperate with the probe portion continuing to station connected societal media.
‘Too active’ online, says court
In oral remarks, the tribunal rebuked Mr. Kumar for being “too active” connected societal media, observing that helium was attempting to sensationalise the substance and power the investigation. “You are giving sermons connected societal media. You indispensable fto the constabulary bash its occupation aft providing the indispensable information,” the tribunal said.
The tribunal besides took enactment of the State’s submission that Mr. Kumar had not disclosed that helium was provided constabulary extortion for implicit a month. “Why person you not informed america that you were fixed extortion from February 3 to March 13?” the tribunal asked.
It further recorded the State’s submission that the petitioner was not cooperating with the investigation, and observed that a idiosyncratic nether probe indispensable cooperate with authorities and repose spot successful the investigative process.
Also work | ‘Mohammad’ Deepak gets question of enactment crossed India
Looking to trim tensions: Counsel
Counsel for Mr. Kumar, advocator Navneesh Negi, argued that his lawsuit had attempted to de-escalate the concern and that the viral video was circulated by others. It was besides contended that contempt identifying the alleged assailants, the constabulary had alternatively registered a lawsuit against Mr. Kumar. He added that his lawsuit was not informed astir the registration of FIRs connected his complaint.
Responding to the State’s objection regarding societal media activity, the counsel argued: “Everyone is connected societal media today. What illegality has been committed? Has thing unconstitutional been said?”
The State countered that portion Mr. Kumar claimed consciousness of developments successful Haridwar and Dehradun, helium professed ignorance astir FIRs registered astatine a constabulary presumption located adjacent to his gym.
Declining to interfere astatine this stage, the tribunal directed the investigating bureau to proceed strictly successful accordance with the Supreme Court’s guidelines successful Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
Disposing of the petition, the tribunal directed the constabulary to guarantee a just probe and reiterated that the petitioner indispensable debar immoderate action, including societal media activity, that could impede the investigation.
