Madras HC Issues Split Verdict In YouTuber Savukku Shankar Case

Justice Swaminathan and Justice Balaji differed with the order in a case challenging YouTuber Savukku Shankar's detention under the Goondas Act. After which, the case has been forwarded to the CJI to nominate a third judge for hearing it.

Chennai: The Madras High Court has given a split verdict in a case challenging detention of YouTuber Savukku Shankar under Goondas Act on Friday.

During the hearing this afternoon, Justice Swaminathan quashed the order while Justice Balaji asked the Tamil Nadu government to respond regarding the Act. As two judges gave different verdicts, the case has been recommended to the Chief Justice for a hearing by a third judge.

The hearing was held on two petitions filed by Shankar's mother, Kamala, one challenging his detention and the other seeking inquiry by the National Human Rights Commission into alleged violence against him in Coimbatore Jail.

On May 12, the Chennai City Police Commissioner issued an order to imprison Shankar, who was arrested for defaming a female police personnel under the Goondas Act and for allegedly disturbing peace.

In her petition, Kamala claimed that "her son did not disturb public peace and the order of imprisoning him under the Goondas Act is illegal and issued without following due process of law."

The bench of Justices Swaminathan and Balaji heard the petition today. Justice Swaminathan stated that Shankar's actions were not prejudicial to public order maintenance but Justice Balaji mentioned that police should be allotted time for filing affidavit.

When the hearing was held earlier this morning, Justice Swaminathan observed that Shankar was arrested in five cases on May 12 without provision of obtaining bail and this was not reflected in the order.

The judges also ordered the NHRC to conduct an inquiry into Kamala's petition of alleged custodial violence on Shankar. The judges asked to complete the investigation within four months. They also questioned how many cases had been registered against Shankar before the introduction of the Act.

Read more