The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday observed that a petition filed by ‘Mohammad’ Deepak seeking police protection was an attempt to influence an ongoing investigation and put pressure on authorities.
Hearing the matter, Justice Rakesh Thapliyal said the petitioner’s apprehensions about his safety were baseless and questioned whether there was any real threat to him.
The court noted that Deepak is a suspected accused in an FIR and held that seeking police protection in such circumstances was unwarranted.
The petition was filed by Deepak and his friend Vijay Rawat after they were booked based on a complaint by a Kotdwar resident. The case stems from a January 26 incident in which Deepak intervened when a group harassed a 70-year-old Muslim shopkeeper over the use of the word “Baba” in his shop’s name. During the confrontation, he identified himself as Mohammad Deepak.
Subsequently, on January 31, members of the Bajrang Dal gathered to confront him but were restrained by police. Separate complaints were also filed alleging that individuals assembled outside a gym, used abusive language, and delivered hate speeches.
The court noted that multiple FIRs had already been registered, including those based on Deepak’s own complaints, prior to the filing of the petition. It rejected the argument that the petitioner was unaware of these developments, pointing out that all FIRs were registered at the same police station.
Deepak had sought quashing of the FIR against him and a departmental inquiry against alleged erring police officials. The court said such requests appeared to be pressure tactics, especially in the absence of specific evidence identifying any misconduct by officials.
The bench added that Deepak had alternative legal remedies, including approaching a magistrate under relevant provisions of the law, and termed the petition unwarranted at this stage of the investigation.
The court also took note of submissions that Deepak had received around Rs 80,000 following the incident, after which his account was blocked, and he appealed on social media for people not to send further money.
Rejecting the plea for protection, the court said the police were already responsible for ensuring his safety and had registered FIRs in response to his complaints regarding threats.
The matter is scheduled for further hearing on Friday.