NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to interfere with the bail conditions imposed by the Madras HC on YouTuber Shankar alias Savukku Shankar in connection with the allegations of assault and extortion by a film producer.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, while upholding the bail granted to Shankar, dismissed his fresh plea seeking certain modifications of bail conditions imposed on him.
On Friday, the SC, refusing to modify Shankar’s bail conditions, said, “This man is coming every week before us. His laptop is seized, he does not file an application before the magistrate for the release of the laptop. He comes to the SC, for the release of the phone which has been seized.”
Questioning the way and manner in which Shankar is functioning, the court pointed out to his counsel Balaji Srinivasan that the accused (Shankar) was not granted bail on merits but on medical grounds, but after being out on bail, he started making videos and reels.
“After going out on bail, you (Shankar) started making reels and videos and other things, and upload them on YouTube. That was not the purpose of the grant of bail. You are misusing your liberty. That is the finding given by the HC,” the court remarked.
The bench — while criticising him for his conduct after being released on bail — also went on to observe that Shankar’s bail has not been cancelled.
Srinivasan, defending his client, argued that he faced medical negligence while he was in custody. He stated that on December 18, 2025, Shankar developed a fever and was taken to Saidapet GH. Although an ECG initially showed variations and a doctor recommended a transfer to a larger facility due to cardiac history, the medical opinion was abruptly changed twenty minutes later.
“There is a deep apprehension regarding the reliability of government doctors, as they eventually declared Shankar fit despite his health concerns,” he alleged.
On the other hand, senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra, appearing for the Police, opposed the submissions of Srinivasan and contended that Shankar had misused the liberty granted by his interim bail.
“Shankar claimed to be ill, he failed to follow up with medical treatments at the hospitals he visited,” Luthra argued, and pointed out that he does not go to the hospital for treatment; rather, he spent his time making social media reels and videos.