Uttarakhand High Court reprimanded Mohammad Deepak, saying- how can an accused seek police protection?:The bench termed such petitions as a pressure tactic aimed at influencing the ongoing investigation and sensationalising the entire matter.

News Topical, Digital Desk : The Uttarakhand High Court reprimanded gym owner Deepak Kumar, who identified himself as 'Mohammad Deepak' in the Kotdwar case, asking how an accused can seek police protection. While hearing Kumar's petition seeking quashing of the FIR, a single bench of Justice Rakesh Thapliyal verbally reprimanded him, objecting to his inclusion of unnecessary requests like demand for police protection and action against police officers for alleged 'biased' conduct.

The bench termed such petitions as pressure tactics aimed at influencing the ongoing investigation and sensationalizing the entire matter. The court also questioned the petitioner's justification for seeking police protection when he himself is a "suspected accused."

Deepak had a fight with Bajrang Dal members.

A case has been registered against Kumar for rioting, causing hurt, and intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace in connection with an incident that occurred on January 26 in Kotdwar. Deepak Kumar allegedly clashed with Bajrang Dal members who objected to a Muslim shopkeeper, Vakil Ahmed, naming his shop "Baba." A video of the incident went viral on social media.

Kumar has approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR. In the petition, Kumar also requested the court to direct the registration of an FIR under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code against those who allegedly made the hate speeches. The petition also requests police protection for Kumar and his family and a departmental inquiry against police officers allegedly responsible for partisan conduct.

The court said the petitioner was a suspected accused

During the hearing, the High Court expressed concern about the validity of such petitions, stating that they were a means of "pressuring the investigating agency." The investigating officer also stated that the petitioner was not in any danger. The High Court questioned the petitioner's rationale for requesting protection despite being a suspected accused. The court remarked that the petitioner is a suspected accused today, and how can a person who is under investigation and is a suspected accused receive police protection? The bench stated that such relief at this stage is completely unnecessary and appears to be merely an attempt to pressure the investigating agency.

The court also took seriously the request for a departmental inquiry against the police officers and, noting that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the allegations, remarked that making such a request while an investigation was pending was merely an attempt to influence the proceedings. During the hearing, it was brought to the court's attention that two FIRs had been registered based on the petitioner's complaint. If any such complaint exists, it will be presented to the court on Friday.

The High Court also asked Deepak about the money.

During the hearing, the High Court also inquired about the petitioner's alleged receipt of funds from supporters after the incident. According to Deepak, he received approximately 80,000 rupees in donations after the incident, after which he stopped account activity.