Madras High Court quashes detention order against YouTuber Savukku Shankar
Aug 09, 2024
Chennai (Tamil Nadu) [India], August 9 : The Madras High Court has quashed the detention order against YouTuber Savukku Shankar by invoking the Goondas Act of 1982.
Justices SM Subramaniam and V Sivagnanam of Madras High Court quashed the preventive detention order passed by the Chennai Commissioner of Police against the YouTuber on May 12.
In July, the Supreme Court granted interim relief to Savukku Shankar until the Madras High Court decided on his detention.
Shankar was arrested on May 4 for allegedly making defamatory remarks against women police officials. The arrest was based on a complaint by a Coimbatore City Police sub-inspector. Following his arrest, the Chennai Police registered two additional cases against him, including one for an old harassment complaint by journalist Sandhya Ravishankar.
After the police arrested Shankar, Sandhya Ravishankar thanked the police in a post, saying, "Thanks to CoP, Chennai, and team."
Chennai Police also registered another case against Shankar, based on a complaint by Veeralakshmi, founder of Tamilar Munnetra Padai, under various IPC sections.
"After 6 years, Chennai Police registered an FIR on the basis of my complaint against 'Savukku' Shankar. CCB/Cyber Crime have registered a case under sections 294(b), 354D, 506(i), 509 IPC and section 4 of TN Prevention of Harassment of Women Act on May 7, 2024. Thanks to CoP, Chennai and team," Ravishankar said in a post on X.
"Further, another case has been registered on the complaint lodged by Veeralakshmi, founder and leader of Tamilar Munnetra Padai, against Shankar alias Savukku Shankar and Felix, at GCP, Central Crime Branch, Cyber Crime Police Station under sections 294(b), 506 (i) IPC: Greater Chennai Police," Chennai Police wrote on X.
On May 12, 2024, a detention order was passed by Tamil Nadu police and branded the YouTuber as a 'goonda' as described in Section 2(f) of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 on the ground that his activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of public peace.
