NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud granted interim relief to YouTuber Savukku Shankar and stayed all the coercive action against him in 17 FIRs.
Advocate Balaji Srinivasan, appearing for Shankar, told the apex court that the latest detention order was issued after the Madras High Court granted Shankar relief and quashed an earlier detention order against Shankar.
"They have again put me and detained me again in preventive detention yesterday. I got bail in all cases. But now they have again detained me yesterday. Please record that," Srinivasan submitted.
He pointed out that the latest detention order against him was passed on allegations that contraband (ganja) was found in Shankar's possession.
"We have stopped all coercive action against him. We have granted protection from any coercive action in all 17 FIRs. File a complete chart of all FIRs as well," the top court noted.
The YouTuber has been in preventive detention earlier, by the state police under the Goondas Act since two months.
"Do you sincerely believe that there should be preventive detention? This is not an ordinary civil dispute. This is preventive detention. Somebody's liberty is involved," the two-judge bench of the top court, led by Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, ordered his release till the Madras High Court decides the plea against his preventive detention.
The Supreme Court pronounced the order, after hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by A Kamala, Shankar’s mother, challenging the wrongful detention of her son by the Respondents (TN government and others) as she alleged that the state government curtailed his freedom of speech and expression so that he could not challenge the current government.
On the last date of the hearing, the apex court had some serious and tough questions for the TN government and asked, "Why should we not grant interim protection (to him)?"
"Preventive detention is a serious law; is he a threat to national security", asked the two-judge Bench of the top court.
The petitioner is the mother of detinue, Shankar, who has stated that her son has played a vital role in exposing the corrupt and illegal activities of the Tamil Nadu government. He is a whistleblower who brings truth and justice to the public, Srinivasan told The New Indian Express Newspaper.
"Both the Orders (Of June, of HC's) are grossly illegal and in grave contravention of the rights of the detinue, i.e., Savukku Shankar, under Articles 19(1)(a), 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India. This submission is reinforced by the fact that two highly placed Government functionaries approached the Judges of the High Court hearing the Petitioner’s Habeas Corpus Petition (HCP) and tried to prevail on the Judges not to decide the case," the petition said.
“Kamala is constrained to approach this Court at this stage challenging the orders as she is simply exercising reasonable caution in the face of monstrous unfairness and injustice faced by her son in hands of the respondents,” Srinivasan said.
According to Srinivasan, the detinue has been held in custody in several false and fabricated cases which were imposed on him by the Respondents.
"It became clear that it was only a matter of time before Detinue would be granted bail in all false cases foisted against him. In haste, the respondents ensured that an illegal and malafide detention order was passed to keep the Detinue in custody for at least a year," he added.
It is to be noted that Justice G R Swaminathan of the Madras HC had quashed the detention order even without waiting for a counter affidavit to be filed by the detaining authority, whereas the other judge in the Bench Justice P B Balaji decided to wait for the counter.
As there was a split verdict, among the two judges in the Bench, so the matter was referred to a third judge, Justice G. Jayachandran, who, on June 6, 2024, ordered a fresh hearing of the HCP (Habeus Corpus Petition) before the Division Bench led by Justice Ramesh.
