SC refuses to interfere with bail conditions of YouTuber Shankar

His phone is seized, he comes to the Supreme Court for release of the phone. Justice Datta told Shankars lawyer Balaji Srinivasan that the accused was not granted bail on merits but on medical grounds but after being out on bail, he started making videos and reels.

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to interfere with the bail conditions imposed by the Madras High Court on YouTuber and journalist Shankar alias Savukku Shankar in connection with allegations of assault and extortion by a film producer. A bench of justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma dismissed the fresh plea of Shankar saying, ''This man is coming every week before us. His laptop is seized, he does not file an application before the magistrate for release of the laptop. He comes to the Supreme Court. His phone is seized, he comes to the Supreme Court for release of the phone.'' Justice Datta told Shankar's lawyer Balaji Srinivasan that the accused 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 started making reels and videos and putting it on YouTube. That was not the purpose of the grant of bail. You are misusing your liberty, that is the finding given by the high court. Now, your bail has not been cancelled, but the high court has imposed conditions and asked you not to talk about pending cases but you are still doing that,'' the bench said. Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the State, submitted that the police needed his mobile phone for investigation, which he did not give and after coming out on bail, he made a video showcasing that phone. He added that Shankar did not visit the hospital for which he was granted interim bail. Justice Sharma remarked, ''Because he was busy making reels.'' Srinivasan said his client was not granted bail on medical grounds and the high court, while granting bail, had criticised the State police for targeting Shankar. He added that the high court had also noted that when Shankar complained of fever, the doctor had taken an ECG test and referred him to the government hospital, considering that he had a past cardiac history. Justice Datta told Srinivasan said if he was so ill then should show some restraint and get well before uploading the videos on YouTube. The bench said it was not inclined to interfere with the bail conditions and dismissed his plea. On January 20, the top court dismissed another plea filed by the YouTuber seeking directions to unseal his office in Chennai and return his seized devices in connection with allegations of assault and extortion by a film producer. It had refused to entertain Shankar's plea challenging an order passed by the Madras High Court and asked him to approach the judicial magistrate. The Madras High Court on December 30, 2025 had declined to stay the sealing order and directed Shankar to approach the jurisdictional magistrate under Sections 105–107 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Shankar in his earlier plea had sought a direction to unseal his office premises situated at No.111, Aranganathan Illam, 2nd Floor, Jai Kasthuri Parthasarathy Nagar, 3rd Street, Adambakkam, Chennai, and further stopping the respondents from deploying the police personnel in the entrance of petitioner's office premises. The Madras High Court on December 26 last year had granted interim bail on health grounds to Shankar in 17 criminal cases after observing that repeated curtailment of his personal liberty by the Tamil Nadu Police can only be construed as an ''abuse of process of law''. Shankar was arrested from his residence on December 13 and booked under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The prosecution alleged that he had extorted money from a film producer.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)