Expedite investigation, trial in 37 cases pending against ‘Savukku’ Shankar: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court, on Tuesday (July 29, 2025), directed Tamil Nadu police to speed up the investigation in 13 criminal cases pending against YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar, before various police stations, and file the final reports before the jurisdictional magistrates within four months.

Justice P. Velmurugan also directed the trial courts, before whom 24 other criminal cases against him were pending pursuant to completion of investigation and filing of charge sheets by the jurisdictional police, to expeite the trial proceedings and complete them within six months.

The judge issued the directions while dismissing a writ petition filed by the YouTuber seeking a direction to the Home Secretary and Director General of Police to consider three representations made by him and consequently forbear Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police from interfering with Savukku Media.

Justice Velmurugan recorded the submission of Additional Advocate General J. Ravindran that the Home Secretary as well as the DGP had already considered the representations made by the petitioner and disposed them of. He said, the petitioner could challenge the decisions in the manner known to law.

The judge also observed there were no materials to prove that the Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police was interfering with the functioning of Savukku Media especially in the light of the number of criminal cases under investigation against him as well as those that were pending trial.

38 cases against ‘Savukku’ Shankar

During the previous hearing of the YouTuber’s writ petition on July 14, the judge had directed the DGP to submit a list of the criminal cases pending against the petitioner. Accordingly, the DGP filed a report on Tuesday stating as many as 38 criminal cases were booked against the YouTuber.

The DGP also said 13 of those cases were under investigation and 24 were pending trial. Only one case was closed as a mistake of fact, the judge was informed. After recording the submissions, the judge ordered expeditious investigation as well as trial in the cases pending against the petitioner.