NEW DELHI: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ordered the Tamil Nadu government to immediately release YouTuber Savukku Shankar, who was detained under the Goondas Act, following the state’s notification that his detention had been revoked based on the Advisory Board’s recommendation.
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Siddharth Luthra, representing the state government, informed the court that no further orders were necessary as the Advisory Board had revoked the detention order on Wednesday, September 25.
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra recorded this statement and concluded the petition by stating, “In light of the above, Savukku Shankar shall be released forthwith, unless required in connection with any other case.”
The Supreme Court was hearing a petition filed by Shankar’s mother, A Kamala, who challenged his detention under the Goondas Act, formally known as the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum Grabbers, and Video Pirates Act, 1982. The detention order was issued on August 12.
Advocate Balaji Srinivasan, representing Shankar’s mother, argued that the fresh detention order was meant to prevent his release, noting that a similar order issued on May 12 had been quashed by the Madras High Court on August 9. He further stated that Shankar had exposed corruption cases within the state government, including a cash-for-jobs scandal involving former minister V Senthil Balaji, who resigned in February.
The state denied these allegations and claimed the latest detention was linked to the recovery of narcotics from Shankar’s possession.
Shankar, a former employee of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC), later founded Savukku Media, which operates a web portal and a YouTube channel. He faces 16 FIRs in the state after making controversial remarks against female police officers during a YouTube interview. He has challenged these FIRs in a separate petition, seeking to have them clubbed together as they stem from the same interview in April. The court, on August 14, issued notice regarding this plea and stayed any coercive action related to these FIRs.
The Supreme Court also asked the state to confirm if the FIRs are related to the same interview, indicating that if they are, they should be combined. These FIRs were filed under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women (Amendment) Act, the Information Technology Act, and various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
