‘Has anyone kept their hand on you?’: Uttarakhand HC calls ‘Mohammad’ Deepak’s petition bid to ‘influence investigation’

Kumar had lodged a complaint against individuals who assembled in front of his gym, allegedly hurled abuses and delivered hate speeches. The police then filed an FIR based on the complaint of a police officer against unknown accused. Kumar has stated in his petition that the police failed to take action despite evidence such as videos and details of the accused.

His petition was heard on Thursday by a single-judge bench of Justice Rakesh Thapliyal.

The court said that in the FIR against Deepak, which he wants quashed, “he is the suspected accused”. “Praying for additional relief appears to be adopting a pressure tactic upon investigating agencies who have been given the task of investigating the impugned FIR,” the court said.

The court noted that Deepak had the option to seek a remedy by approaching a magistrate under Section 175(3) of the BNSS. Instead, the court noted, he filed a petition, which was “unwarranted, particularly when the person praying is himself an accused in an FIR”. The High Court said that relief on that count could not be granted at this juncture. “The state has informed that, so far as his complaint is concerned, an FIR has been registered. On his complaint, two FIRs are registered… copy of the FIRs are placed on record. This petition was filed on February 20. Whereas both the FIRs were registered much prior, on February 8 and 11,” the court said.

On this, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that no such information was provided to them by the police. The court said that the FIR, which he has sought to quash, was registered at the same police station as the others, and the fact that the petitioner was unaware of this cannot be accepted.

Weighing on the prayer for police protection and the submission of the counsel for the state that she received instructions telephonically from the investigating officer that there was no threat on Deepak’s safety, the court said, “Two aspects are relevant – the first, the status of the petitioner is that of a suspected accused… in this petition, whether the petitioner can pray for adequate police protection when he is under investigation… how can a suspected accused who is under investigation pray for police protection. Such a relief is wholly unwarranted, and it appears that it is nothing but in order to put pressure on the investigating agency.” It added that the police are competent enough to ensure his safety, as they have been tasked with investigating an FIR where he is the accused.

The petition had called the FIR against Deepak partisan and sought a departmental inquiry against “erring officials”. The court said that it appeared as “an attempt to adopt a pressure tactic on the investigating agency”. “… there is no such material on record on who those erring officials are. Making broad allegations cannot be accepted. There should be some material, and surprisingly, all FIRs are still under investigation. Therefore, the question is whether the petitioner, who is a suspected accused, can pray for such relief when police personnel are conducting the investigation… Therefore, praying for such a relief for departmental proceedings is nothing but to somehow influence the pending investigation in respect of the impugned FIR and FIRs lodged on the complaint of the petitioner,” the court added.

The court asked the petitioner’s counsel, Navnish Negi, about the amount received following the incident. He said that the account was blocked after a large amount was received. Deepak received around Rs 80,000, after which he appealed to the people on social media not to send any more.

The counsel for the petitioners said that there was a real threat on the ground and on social media in front of the police. “Your apprehensions are baseless. Go to the police station and tell the officer that you are unsafe. They will act on it,” the court observed orally, to which the state said that FIRs have already been registered on the complaints of the petitioner in connection with such threats. The court said that it is March, more than a month after the incident, and added, “Has someone kept their hand on you (kisi ne haath lagaaya hai)? These apprehensions have no head or tail; it is a disease. The entire police have their eyes on you, don’t worry.”

The matter is listed for Friday.