The Supreme Court has stayed proceedings against Deepak Kumar, who stood up for a Muslim shopowner against Bajrandal. Deepak approached the court seeking the quashing of the case over allegations during his confrontation with Bajrandal members while the mob was assaulting a Muslim shopkeeper.
The court also stayed an order of the Uttarakhand High Court that earlier restrained Deepak from making social media posts. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who appeared for Deepak, said that his client intervened as the Bajrang Dal members objected to a Muslim shopkeeper over the use of the word “Baba” in his shop’s name, Live Law reported.
This comes following Deepak becoming a social media sensation after his confrontation with Bajrang Dal members who stood up in support of a Muslim shopkeeper. When asked about his name during the confrontation, he said, “Mohammad Deepak.” The incident later garnered social media attention with mixed opinions.
“I was sitting in the shop next door. When I got up and came out, I saw that Baba (the Muslim shopowner) was being attacked. I tried to talk to them because an elderly man was being assaulted,” Deepak told FoEJ Media.
“When I tried to stop them, they asked me, ‘Who are you? What is your name?’” he said.
To this repeated question, Deepak replied that he was speaking from the side of humanity.
“The mob asked me my name. I said, ‘What does my name have to do with this?’ But when they kept insisting, I replied, ‘My name is Muhammad Deepak'” he said.
The statement, captured on camera, made rounds on the internet, gaining compliments for the bravery of “Muhammad Deepak.” On the other hand, it attracted negativity too, creating pandemonium in Deepak’s life.
Singhvi, as reported by Livelaw, said that Deepak had himself lodged complaints associated with the incident and no action had been taken on them; however, an FIR was registered against him.
Deepak had approached the High Court to quash the FIR registered against him, but the High Court had refused to interfere with the case, asking him to cooperate with the investigation. Furthermore, the court also directed Deepak and another person associated with the case to not pass any statement or to not upload any videos on social media centring the matter.
“The petitioner has a right to challenge the FIR, but as pointed out by the State, as all offenses carry less than a seven-year sentence, the investigating agency is under legal obligation to follow Supreme Court guidelines….Petitioners are also directed to cooperate and not indulge on social media,” the court said.
