The Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday directed the state authorities to file status reports on all FIRs registered in connection with the January Kotdwar incident involving gym operator Deepak Kumar, who gained attention as “Mohammad Deepak” after confronting Bajrang Dal activists. The court also asked him to submit a detailed affidavit disclosing the donations he has received following the viral video of the incident.
A single bench of Justice Rakesh Thapliyal was hearing a petition filed by Deepak Kumar, who has sought quashing of an FIR lodged against him, initiation of departmental proceedings against police personnel, and protection for his family.
During the hearing, the court took note of Deepak’s statement that since the video of the incident circulated widely on social media, he has been receiving small monetary contributions ranging between ₹100 and ₹500 in his bank account. In response, the court directed him to place on record a detailed affidavit specifying the total amount received.
The case arises from an incident in Kotdwar where Bajrang Dal workers objected to a Muslim shopkeeper, Vakil Ahmed, naming his shop ‘Baba’. Deepak intervened in support of Ahmed. In a video that later went viral, Deepak questioned the demand to change the shop’s name, stating that the establishment had existed for over 30 years. When asked about his identity by the crowd, he responded, “My name is Mohammad Deepak.”
Following the incident, the Kotdwar police registered three separate FIRs. The first was against 30–40 unidentified individuals allegedly involved in protesting against the shopkeeper, accusing them of disturbing public peace, obstructing government work, and manhandling police personnel under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
A second FIR was lodged on the complaint of Vakil Ahmed, who alleged that the protesters used abusive language and caused public disturbance.
The third FIR was registered against Deepak Kumar and his associate Vijay Rawat based on a complaint by a local resident, Kamal Prasad, accusing them of misbehavior, snatching a mobile phone, and criminal intimidation.
During proceedings, the High Court expressed scepticism over the plea seeking departmental inquiry against police officials, indicating that the investigation should proceed in accordance with the law.
The court has directed the state government to submit a status report on the progress of the investigation in all related FIRs. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on March 19.
