Mr. Deepak at Kotdwar City. | Photo Credit: Tayyab Hussain The Uttarakhand High Court on Tuesday (March 17, 2026) directed the Kotdwar police to submit a status update on the investigation related to a First Information Report (FIR) registered against ‘Mohammed’ Deepak, a gym owner who came into national attention after confronting a group of right-wing activists accused of harassing a 71-year-old Muslim shop owner and pressuring him to rename his store. The episode occurred on Republic Day, when members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal objected to the name of a long-standing garment shop, ‘Baba School Dress and Matching Centre’, owned by Wakeel Ahmed. As the situation intensified, Mr. Deepak intervened to protect the elderly man. A video of the incident later went viral, particularly highlighting the moment when he introduced himself as “Mera naam Muhammad Deepak” (my name is Mohammad Deepak). Following the incident, Mr. Deepak received threats from right-wing supporters, and on January 31, a group assembled outside his gym in protest. The police registered three FIRs in connection with the matter — a first against Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal members based on the shopkeeper’s complaint; another against Mr. Deepak, accusing him of snatching and disturbing public order, based on a complaint by VHP members; and a third against unidentified individuals who protested outside Mr. Deepak’s gym. After the incident, Mr. Deepak attracted support from across the country. His business had suffered significantly as memberships declined due to his stance in defence of the shopkeeper, he said. Navnesh Negi, Mr. Deepak’s counsel, stated that the petition before the High Court was filed in good faith to ensure that the contributions received by Mr. Deepak were not later used against him by the authorities. The Bench, led by Justice Thapliyal, also directed Mr. Deepak to furnish details regarding donations received for his gym. During the hearing, Mr. Negi further argued that while the police had lodged an FIR against the mob, without naming any accused despite video evidence identifying individuals, they had registered a specific FIR against Mr. Deepak, suggesting he was being unfairly targeted for his actions. The High Court also asked the police to clarify why no case had been registered based on Mr. Deepak’s complaint against individuals who were clearly identifiable in the video recordings. Published – March 17, 2026 08:44 pm IST Share this: Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email More Click to print (Opens in new window) Print Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon Click to share on Nextdoor (Opens in new window) Nextdoor Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky Like this:Like Loading... Post navigation Huge devotee turnout for Ugadi Mahotsavams in Srisailam Leela Samson pays ₹8 lakh for terming dance intern as ‘mistress’ in her Facebook post, gets criminal case quashed