The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to restrain Tamil Nadu police from arresting YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar, 48, in multiple cases registered against him at various police stations across the State for having spoken ill about women police personnel in a YouTube interview.
Justice G. Jayachandran rejected the plea for interim protection without granting an opportunity to Government Advocate (criminal side) K.M.D. Muhilan to ascertain whether a list of First Information Reports (FIRs) provided by the YouTuber were related to the same interview that he had given to a YouTube channel.
The judge granted three weeks’ time for the Government Advocate to obtain instructions from the police after the law officer said, not all 16 FIRs which the YouTuber had listed out in an annexure could be related to the same interview and that in any case, he would require sometime to verify the claim.
In his submissions before the court, the YouTuber’s counsel Balaji Srinivasan said, that the Supreme Court had granted interim bail to his client even in a preventive detention order passed under the Goondas Act and yet he was unable to step out of the prison because of multiple cases registered for the same incident.
“They are arresting me in one after another case. In some cases, magistrates have refused to remand me but in other cases, I have been remanded. It is because of these cases, I am not able to come out. They can’t frustrate the proceedings like this. It is no longer prosecution, it is persecution now,” he said.
However, the judge said, no interim relief could be granted in a petition filed by the YouTuber to club all cases registered against him with respect to the same incident without giving an opportunity to the Government Advocate to find out whether all those cases were related to the same interview or not.
In his affidavit, the petitioner said, the first FIR in connection with the interview was booked against him by the Coimbatore cyber crime police on the basis of a complaint that he had spoken ill of women police personnel. Thereafter, 16 other cases were registered before various districts on the basis of the same interview.
“While I am not defending my action, if (sic) I had intentionally spoken the same would be subject to decisions of the courts,” the petitioner said and complained that he was now being paraded before different courts day in and day out, with the sole intention of harassing him, despite video conferencing facility being available at the Puzhal central prison as well as the courts.
Claiming he was a whistleblower who had been exposing alleged misgovernance as well as the misdeeds of bureaucrats, the petitioner said, multiple criminal cases had been booked against him ever since he was arrested first on May 4 and that he had also been detained under the Goondas Act in order to wreak vengeance. He accused the police of acting “as per the desires of the political bosses.”
He went on to state that the interview given by him regarding women police personnel had led to registration of FIRs at the police stations in Coimbatore, Tiruchi, Madurai, Dindigul, Kancheepuram, Villupuram, Perambalur, Nagapattinam, the Nilgiris, Sivaganga, Nagapattinam, Salem and Tirunelveli districts. He said that it would be a herculean task for him to run from district to district to contest each and every case.
“I strongly believe that the cases foisted against me are all false and done only to prevent me from being free. Because, if I am free and in public, I would question and raise my voice of dissent against the people in power,” the petitioner said and sought a direction to club all the cases. He also stated to have given a representation in this regard to the DGP as well as Additional DGP (Headquarters) on July 24.
Published - August 08, 2024 01:29 pm IST
