SC stays FIR against man who helped Muslim shopkeeper in Bajrang Dal row

The Supreme Court has stayed proceedings from an FIR against a Dehradun gym owner who intervened for a Muslim shopkeeper during a confrontation with Bajrang Dal members. The court also stayed a High Court order that gagged him on social media.

Dehradun gym owner Mohammad Deepak Kumar (File photo/ANI)

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed proceedings arising from a first information report FIR against Dehradun gym owner Mohammad Deepak Kumar, who had intervened on behalf of a Muslim shopkeeper during the latter's confrontation with Bajrang Dal members after they allegedly objected to the use of the word "Baba" in the name of his shop.

'Good Samaritan' Faces FIR After Aiding Shopkeeper

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta also stayed the Uttarakhand High Court's order, which had restrained Deepak from posting messages or videos about the incident on social media. The Court issued notice to the respondent authorities on Deepak's plea challenging the High Court's refusal to quash the FIR and has sought a response in four weeks.

Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Deepak, told the bench that his client had intervened after members of the Bajrang Dal objected to the Muslim shopkeeper using the word "Baba" in the name of his shop. Singhvi said Deepak was subsequently confronted by the group and, when asked his name, replied, "Mohammed Deepak."

Legal Arguments Challenge FIR and Gag Order

Singhvi submitted that Deepak had gone to assist the shopkeeper after the confrontation and had also lodged complaints in relation to the incident. However, according to the counsel, no action was taken on those complaints, while an FIR was registered against Deepak. "How can a good Samaritan be subjected to this kind of a complaint?" Singhvi submitted.

The senior advocate also relied on video footage of the incident and questioned the reasoning adopted by the High Court while declining to quash the FIR. He argued that the video evidence showed that the sequence of events was different from what was alleged in the case.

Singhvi pointed out that an offence relating to rioting under Section 191 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita had initially been invoked against Deepak. He submitted that the provision was subsequently dropped after no essential ingredients of the offence were found to have been made out.

He further argued that the offences that continued against Deepak were punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. Therefore, he submitted, the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar concerning arrest and investigation in such cases would apply.

Singhvi also challenged the High Court's direction restraining Deepak from putting out messages or videos concerning the incident on social media. He argued that the direction went beyond what was necessary and effectively imposed a blanket gag order on his client.

The Supreme Court, while issuing notice, directed that proceedings pursuant to the FIR would remain stayed in the meantime. It also stayed the effect and operation of the High Court order, including the restriction imposed on Deepak's social media posts. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)