Chennai, May 13 The Madras High Court on Wednesday granted conditional bail to YouTuber and journalist Savukku Shankar in an attempt to murder case, observing that an individual’s liberty cannot be curtailed merely because the allegations against him are serious.
Justice Victoria Gowri, while allowing the bail petition, held that continued incarceration was unnecessary when the accused's presence could be secured through stringent conditions imposed by the court.
The court directed Shankar to execute a bond of Rs 25,000, with two sureties for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the Madhavaram Judicial Magistrate.
It also ordered him to appear daily before the police and to fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation.
The case against Shankar was registered after an alleged incident involving a police officer while he was being transported from Ongole in Andhra Pradesh to Puzhal prison in Chennai following his arrest in a cheating and extortion case.
According to the prosecution, the police vehicle carrying Shankar had stopped on the way to allow him to relieve himself.
At that time, a group of men who arrived in another vehicle allegedly picked a quarrel with a Sub-Inspector of Police, verbally abused him, and hurled stones.
The prosecution further claimed that Shankar also joined in pelting stones at the officer, creating panic among the public.
Based on the incident, police registered another case against Shankar and others under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including charges related to rioting, assault on a public servant, and attempt to murder.
Seeking bail, Shankar denied the allegations and contended that no such incident had occurred.
He argued that the case was fabricated with the intention of detaining him under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act.
He also claimed that he was arrested in Ongole after returning from Bengaluru, where he had gone to visit his ailing mother.
Opposing the plea, the prosecution submitted that Shankar was a habitual offender with 48 criminal cases pending against him and argued that he could abscond or influence witnesses if released on bail.
However, the High Court observed that the existence of a preventive detention order would not prevent the court from considering a bail plea in a specific criminal case.
The court clarified that its observations were limited to deciding the bail application and would not affect the ongoing investigation.
--IANS
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor