DEHRADUN: The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday issued a stern rebuke to Deepak Kumar who gained prominence for defending a Muslim shopkeeper against right-wing activists during a recent communal standoff in Kotdwar. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal, presiding over a petition filed by Kumar, dismissed his demands for police protection and a departmental inquiry against local officers, labelling the entire legal exercise an "abuse of process."
Kumar had approached the High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR lodged against him following a high-profile altercation on January 26. The confrontation arose after members of the Bajrang Dal objected to a local shopkeeper, Wakeel Ahmed, naming his establishment "Baba School Dress and Matching Center." The group demanded the name be changed, citing the proximity of the revered Baba Sidhbali temple, known for its deep religious significance.
In a viral video of the incident, Kumar is seen questioning the agitators, pointing out that the shop has operated under that name for over 30 years. When the crowd demanded his identity, Kumar retorted, "My name is Mohammad Deepak." Following the incident, a case was registered against Kumar and his associate, Vijay Rawat, on January 28, based on a complaint by one Kamal Prasad, alleging intimidation and misconduct.
During the hearing, Justice Thapliyal expressed deep dissatisfaction with the petitioner's multifaceted prayer. "This is a complete abuse of process. The person who is an accused is praying for protection? Trust them [the police]. You are a suspected accused," the bench remarked. The court further criticized Kumar’s request for a departmental inquiry against police personnel, terming it a "pressure tactic."
"What type of prayer is this? This is a pressure tactic. I will dismiss with exemplary costs," the judge warned, adding that the petitioner appeared to be "burdening" the police. When Kumar’s counsel, advocate Navnish Negi, argued that his client was merely trying to de-escalate tensions and faced genuine threats, the court directed him to focus on the legal merits of quashing the FIR rather than narrating "the story."
The bench also questioned the feasibility of the request for state protection, asking: "Suppose the court grants protection, how can they [the police] investigate?"
In a significant development during the proceedings, the single-judge bench directed Kumar to submit a detailed affidavit disclosing the total funds received in his bank account. This follows claims by Kumar that he has been receiving small donations ranging from Rs 100 to Rs 500 from supporters after his video went viral on social media.
The court has adjourned the matter until Friday, allowing the petitioner’s counsel time to clarify specific aspects of the filing. The case remains under close scrutiny as legal arguments shift toward the legitimacy of the FIR against the backdrop of the heightened communal atmosphere in the region.