The Supreme Court on Monday stayed proceedings arising from the FIR against Uttarakhand gym owner Deepak Kumar, popularly referred to as ‘Mohammad’ Deepak, in connection with a confrontation involving Bajrang Dal members and a Muslim shopkeeper. A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice on Kumar’s plea challenging the Uttarakhand High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR and, in the meantime, stayed both the proceedings pursuant to the FIR and the operation of the High Court’s order.

The case arose from a January 2026 incident in which Kumar had confronted members of the Bajrang Dal after they objected to a Muslim shopkeeper using the word “Baba” in the name of his shop. When asked his name during the confrontation, Kumar responded that he was “Mohammad Deepak”, and a video of the incident subsequently went viral. A complaint was later lodged against him alleging offences including causing hurt, rioting, criminal intimidation and intentional insult under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Appearing for petitioner Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that his client had intervened to help the shopkeeper and had himself lodged complaints concerning the incident, but an FIR was instead registered against him. Mr Singhvi also challenged the High Court’s reasoning and pointed to the invocation of a rioting-related provision despite, according to him, its essential ingredients not being made out. He further argued that the offences invoked carried sentences of less than seven years and that the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar therefore applied.

While refusing to quash the FIR, the High Court had restrained Kumar from sending messages or videos concerning the January incident and the case, reasoning that such posts could affect the investigation. Mr Singhvi described the restriction as a “blanket gag order” imposed on his client.

The Supreme Court has now stayed the operation of that restriction as well. The order states: “Issue notice. In the meantime, proceedings from the impugned FIR and effect and operation of the high court order to remain stayed.” The matter has been made returnable in four weeks.

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed proceedings arising from the FIR against Uttarakhand gym owner Deepak Kumar, popularly referred to as ‘Mohammad’ Deepak, in connection with a confrontation involving Bajrang Dal members and a Muslim shopkeeper. A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta issued notice on Kumar’s plea challenging the Uttarakhand High Court’s refusal to quash the FIR and, in the meantime, stayed both the proceedings pursuant to the FIR and the operation of the High Court’s order.

The case arose from a January 2026 incident in which Kumar had confronted members of the Bajrang Dal after they objected to a Muslim shopkeeper using the word “Baba” in the name of his shop. When asked his name during the confrontation, Kumar responded that he was “Mohammad Deepak”, and a video of the incident subsequently went viral. A complaint was later lodged against him alleging offences including causing hurt, rioting, criminal intimidation and intentional insult under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

Appearing for petitioner Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that his client had intervened to help the shopkeeper and had himself lodged complaints concerning the incident, but an FIR was instead registered against him. Mr Singhvi also challenged the High Court’s reasoning and pointed to the invocation of a rioting-related provision despite, according to him, its essential ingredients not being made out. He further argued that the offences invoked carried sentences of less than seven years and that the safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar therefore applied.

While refusing to quash the FIR, the High Court had restrained Kumar from sending messages or videos concerning the January incident and the case, reasoning that such posts could affect the investigation. Mr Singhvi described the restriction as a “blanket gag order” imposed on his client.

The Supreme Court has now stayed the operation of that restriction as well. The order states: “Issue notice. In the meantime, proceedings from the impugned FIR and effect and operation of the high court order to remain stayed.” The matter has been made returnable in four weeks.