'Suspect Can't Seek Protection': Uttarakhand HC Rebukes 'Mohd' Deepak’s Plea
Uttarakhand High Court questions Deepak Kumar’s plea for police protection and FIR quashing.
advertisement
Deepak Kumar, a gym owner from Uttarakhand, approached the Uttarakhand High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against him following an incident in Kotdwar on 26 January. He also requested police protection and an inquiry into the police investigation, alleging bias. The court questioned the validity of his requests, particularly as he is a suspected accused in the case, and sought clarification on the threat perception presented by his counsel.
As reported by Hindustan Times, Deepak Kumar intervened when a Muslim shopkeeper was allegedly harassed by right-wing activists, leading to three FIRs, including one against Kumar. The FIR against him included charges of rioting, causing hurt, and intentional insult with intent to provoke a breach of peace.
The court, presided over by Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, questioned how Deepak Kumar, as a suspected accused, could seek police protection. Court proceedings indicated that the investigating officer found no substantial threat to Kumar, despite his counsel’s claims of intimidation following the January incident.
During the hearing, the bench expressed concern over the multiple reliefs sought in the petition, including a departmental inquiry against police officers. The court observed that such requests could be interpreted as attempts to influence or sensationalise the matter. In the judge’s remarks, “The first incident happened on January 26, the second on January 31. February has passed and half of March is over — has anyone touched your client so far?”
The court stated, “These were pressure tactics used by him and his counsel to influence and sensationalise the matter.”
Advocate Navnish Negi, representing Deepak Kumar, argued that his client had received threats and that a crowd had gathered outside his gym, creating fear. However, the bench noted that the petition’s drafting, which included several reliefs by a suspected accused, was unsatisfactory and could be seen as an attempt to put pressure on the investigating officers.
Justice Thapliyal further questioned the state counsel about the actual threat perception, and it was clarified that no credible threat to Deepak Kumar had been identified as per the investigation.
Justice Thapliyal observed, “It was unclear how he could seek police protection while being a suspected accused.”
The court’s scrutiny extended to the inclusion of a request for an FIR under Section 196 of the BNS against those allegedly making hate speeches. Legal analysis highlighted that the court was not satisfied with the manner in which multiple reliefs were combined in a single petition by the accused.
Note: This article is produced using AI-assisted tools and is based on publicly available information. It has been reviewed by The Quint's editorial team before publishing.