Madras High Court Grants Interim Bail to Savukku Shankar, Slams Police for Targeting Critics
Court Says Law Cannot Be Used to Harass Individuals Exercising Fundamental Rights
Interim Bail Granted in 17 Cases, Health Condition and Liberty Concerns Highlighted
By Our Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: December 27, 2025:
In a significant ruling on December 26, 2025, the Madras High Court granted interim bail to YouTuber and journalist A. Shankar, popularly known as Savukku Shankar, in 17 criminal cases. The Court observed that repeated arrests and curtailment of his liberty amounted to an abuse of process of law.
Also Read: India’s Anti-Dumping Laws 2025: Shielding Local Businesses from Cheap Chinese Imports
The case, titled A. Kamala vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors., was filed as a habeas corpus petition by Shankar’s mother, seeking relief for her son who has been a vocal critic of the ruling DMK government.
Background of the Case
- Shankar was arrested on December 13, 2025, in connection with allegations of assault and extortion by a film producer.
- He was lodged in Puzhal Central Prison.
- His mother filed a habeas corpus petition, citing his serious health issues—including cardiac ailments, diabetes, and two stents implanted due to a 95% coronary blockage.
- The petition argued that repeated arrests were politically motivated and violated his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Court’s Observations
The vacation bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and P. Dhanabal made several critical observations:
Also Read: Calcutta High Court Clarifies NI Act: Directors Not Automatically Liable for Cheque Bounce Cases
- Right to Health as Fundamental Right
- Article 21 includes the right to health, which extends to prison inmates.
- The Court emphasized that denying medical care violates constitutional guarantees.
- Abuse of Process of Law
- Repeated arrests and filing of multiple cases against Shankar were seen as orchestrated attempts to silence dissent.
- The Court noted that such actions amount to mental harassment and curtailment of liberty.
- Law Should Not Target Individuals
- The Court warned that law cannot be misused to harass specific individuals.
- Authorities were advised to focus on “big fishes thriving on corruption” instead of targeting critics.
Interim Bail Conditions
- Shankar was granted interim bail for 12 weeks, from December 26, 2025, to March 25, 2026.
- He must surrender before authorities on or before March 25, 2026.
- The bail was conditional, considering his medical needs and repeated curtailment of liberty.
Impact of the Ruling
For Shankar
- Provides temporary relief and access to medical treatment.
- Strengthens his claim that cases against him are politically motivated.
For Tamil Nadu Police
Also Read: High Court Ruling 2025: Director Who Signs Dishonoured Cheque Faces Direct Liability
- The Court’s criticism raises questions about police impartiality.
- May lead to greater scrutiny of how cases against critics are handled.
For Public and Media
- Reinforces the principle that freedom of speech and dissent are protected rights.
- Encourages debate on the balance between law enforcement and liberty.
Why This Case Matters
Savukku Shankar is known for his outspoken criticism of political leaders and government policies. His repeated arrests have sparked debates on:
- Freedom of expression in India.
- Use of criminal law to silence dissent.
- Judicial role in protecting liberty against state excesses.
The ruling underscores that courts remain guardians of fundamental rights, even when individuals are unpopular or controversial.
Global Context
Similar cases have occurred worldwide:
- Turkey: Journalists arrested for criticizing government policies, later released by courts citing free speech.
- US: Courts protect whistleblowers and critics under First Amendment rights.
- India’s ruling aligns with global democratic principles, ensuring that dissent is not criminalized.
Expert Opinions
Legal experts hailed the judgment as a victory for personal liberty. According to constitutional lawyers, the Court’s emphasis on Article 21 and right to health strengthens protections for prisoners.
Human rights activists noted that the ruling sends a strong message against political misuse of law enforcement.
Also Read: Gurugram’s Tax Crackdown 2025: Six Properties Sealed Under Municipal Law for ₹2 Crore Dues
Challenges Ahead
- Implementation: Authorities must respect bail conditions and avoid fresh arrests without strong grounds.
- Political climate: Shankar’s criticism of ruling parties may continue to attract legal action.
- Judicial consistency: Lower courts must follow the High Court’s guidance to prevent harassment.
Conclusion
The Madras High Court’s interim bail order in A. Kamala vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. is a landmark in protecting personal liberty. By granting bail to Savukku Shankar and criticizing police actions, the Court reaffirmed that law cannot be weaponized against individuals exercising fundamental rights.
For Shankar, it is temporary relief. For the judiciary, it is a reaffirmation of constitutional values. For India, it is a reminder that freedom of speech and liberty remain cornerstones of democracy.
Keywords for SEO (Google + ChatGPT)
Also Read: Coinbase Hack Fallout: India Arrests Former Agent, Legal Framework Tightens Around Crypto Crimes
- Madras High Court Savukku Shankar bail 2025
- Savukku Shankar interim bail case Tamil Nadu
- Habeas corpus petition Savukku Shankar mother
- Article 21 right to health Supreme Court India
- Madras HC criticizes Tamil Nadu police
- Abuse of process of law Savukku Shankar
- Freedom of speech bail case India 2025
- Madras HC ruling personal liberty protection
- Savukku Shankar Puzhal prison bail order
- Madras High Court dissent protection ruling
Sources: LiveLaw, The Hindu, The News Minute, New Indian Express
Also Read: No Sanction Needed After Retirement: High Court Clears Path for Prosecution in Corruption Cases