TN: YouTuber Savukku Shankar Found Guilty of Criminal Contempt, Gets 6 Months Prison Term

 Shankar was asked to explain why he should not be held guilty of "scandalising the judiciary" by levelling corruption charges against it.

The Wire, 16 September 2022: New Delhi: The Madras high court on Thursday, September 16, sentenced Tamil Nadu YouTuber and political commentator Savukku Shankar to six months in prison after finding him guilty of contempt for his allegations of corruption in the higher judiciary.

In an interview with Youtube channel ‘Red Pix 24×7’, Shankar had reportedly remarked that the entire higher judiciary of the country is “riddled with corruption” on the basis of which the court had lodged a suo motu case of contempt of court. 

Hearing the case, a bench of Justices G.R. Swaminathan and B. Pugalendhi found him guilty, noting that it would have closed proceedings if Shankar was apologetic but at no point did he express regret or remorse and even said he was justified in making the remarks.

The court also refused to entertain Shankar’s request that his sentence be suspended until he files an appeal with the Supreme Court. As such, the court directed that the Youtuber be taken into custody  and lodged in Madurai central prison.

The court noted that Shankar had admitted to making the remarks he has been charged with making and that it does not take a “forensic mind” to see that these remarks are ex-facie scandalous.

“They denigrate and deride the institution of judiciary. The legal maxim “res ipsa loquitor” (the thing speaks for itself) can be analogically applied,” LiveLaw quoted the bench as observing.

Further, while observing that the contemnor (Shankar) is at liberty to highlight specific instances of corruption, provided the allegations can be substantiated, the court said he cannot “tar the entire institution with a single brush”. It also noted that his remarks were not a “slip of tongue”.

This is the second suo motu contempt case registered by the court against the Youtuber, the first relating to tweets he had made against Justice Swaminathan.

In the course of the hearing, Shankar had contended that Justice Swaminathan cannot be a judge in his own case because the contemnor had made remarks against him. However, the judge noted that, upon seeing the tweets in question, he had informed the court registry and told it to place the matter before the bench of the Chief Justice.

The Chief Justice, as ‘master of the roster’, had constituted the bench to hear the case, which included Justice Swaminathan and as such, it was the judge’s duty to hear the case, the bench observed. 

In the last hearing in the case on September 8, Shankar had said that he stood by his statements. Then, when the court sought a reply from the YouTuber, the latter asked for more time to frame his reply and also sought transcripts of the impugned Youtube interview. 

While the request was initially denied and the case was listed to continue later that same day, his request was eventually accommodated and the matter was listed to be heard on September 15.

In the present hearing, Shankar filed his reply in which he said that no action had been taken against him in the first contempt case (relating to the tweets). Further, he argued that the court has been unfairly expanding the charges against him which made it difficult for him to file his reply. As such, he criticised the conduct of the court in this case.

He also submitted that the judiciary could benefit from a variety of opinions and that free speech, free thoughts and free opinions should be protected.

Despite his arguments, the court passed its order finding him guilty.

“The conduct of the contemnor deserves to be noted. Nowhere he expressed his regret or remorse. He did not offer any apology at all. On the other hand, he asserted that he was justified in making the charged statements. A reading of the charged statements would lead anyone to the conclusion that they are likely to lower the prestige and dignity of courts and judges. We, therefore, hold that the contemnor is guilty of criminal contempt,” the court order convicting Shankar said.