‘Savukku’ Shankar seeks discharge from case on tweets against Palaniswami, Panneerselvam

The Madras High Court on Monday (March 9, 2026) granted four weeks’ time for Chennai Cyber Crime police to file its counter affidavit in a plea by YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar to discharge him from a criminal case registered in the year 2000 for 32 of his tweets against former Chief Ministers Edappadi K. Palaniswami and O. Panneerselvam and a few other politicians.

Justice C. Kumarappan adjourned the hearing on a criminal revision petition filed by the YouTuber in October 2025 to April 9, 2026, and extended until then an interim stay of the case pending before the XI Metropolitan Magistrate court at Saidapet in Chennai. The hearing was adjourned as the police had not filed their counter affidavit yet to the criminal revision case.

The revision had been filed against the Metropolitan Magistrate’s October 16, 2025, order refusing to discharge the YouTuber on the ground that the prosecution had accused him of having posted abusive and derogatory tweets with caricatures on his X (then Twitter) handle and that such messages would not fall under the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution.

Further, taking note that the police had already filed a chargesheet against the petitioner under Sections 153 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot) and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Magistrate had concluded that the accused must necessarily face trial in the case and that he could not be discharged without trial.

Assailing the Magistrate’s order before the High Court, the petitioner contended that the police had failed to prove that it was he who had posted those 32 tweets as alleged by AIADMK advocates wing deputy secretary G. Prakash Kumar, who had lodged the complaint. He denied having posted them on his X handle and claimed to have been falsely implicated in the case with an ulterior motive.

He said, no case under Sections 153 and 504 had been made out against him since there was no intent to cause riots or provoke breach of peace. “The alleged tweets are nothing but a mere expression of opinion of public affairs and political views,” he claimed. Further, stating that the police had failed to file the chargesheet within three years, he said, the discharge petition ought to have been allowed by the Magistrate on this ground, too.