‘Savukku’ Shankar. Archive
The Madras High Court on Wednesday (July 1, 2026) dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe against Indian Police Service (IPS) officer A. Arun on the basis of adverse comments and restrictions imposed against the latter in a court order.
Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan said the court order relied on by the petitioner records the hostile context and serious personal allegations leveled by him against the IPS officer in the past. Therefore, the intention behind the present petition cannot be termed as purely public spirit or good faith, the judges said.
“Definitive proof of substance and public interest cannot be used as a shield to validate an action that is fundamentally rooted in personal animosity. In the present case, the record is unequivocally clear about the personal grievance of the petitioner against the fourth respondent and the same completely strips this petition of its bona fide character,” the Court observed.
The petitioner had relied on a no-confidence order passed by a summer vacation court of Justices GR Swaminathan and V. Lakshminarayanan against Mr. Arun on May 29, 2026. Now the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, the officer was detained by the court for a series of preventive detention orders passed during his stint as Commissioner of Police of Greater Chennai.
After quashing one such order, passed under the Goondas Act against real estate agent Santosh Sharma, who was facing a cheating case filed by DMDK Rajya Sabha member S. Poornajothi, LK Sudhish, the bench headed by Justice Swaminathan had come down heavily on Mr. Arun and recorded the finding that the detention order had been passed for “extraneous reasons”.
The vacation court had also observed in its verdict that the police officer was “accustomed” to issuing such arrest warrants under the Goondas Act and cited instances of similar warrants issued by the same officer against the present petitioner and against journalist R. Varaaki. He also highlighted that both arrest warrants had also been quashed by the High Court.
“One Savukku Shankar had leveled serious allegations against Thiru Arun IPS. According to him, Thiru Arun IPS., had accumulated wealth worth a few hundred crore rupees. Thiru Savukku Shankar also led a campaign against the previous government. He was arrested as Goonda by the same video warrant of the officer dated April 9, 2026,” the summer vacation bench had written.
Underlining that specific paragraph relating to personal animosity between the present petitioner and Mr. Arun from the judgment of May 29, the Supreme Court now said: “The said observation unequivocally demonstrates an equation of personal confrontation between the petitioner, Savukku Shankar, and the fourth respondent.”
Considering that the present PIL petition is not maintainable, the judges also said, “It is a well-settled principle of constitutional jurisprudence that a public interest litigation cannot be used as a strategic weapon to settle personal scores or satisfy a private grudge. The jurisdiction (writ) of Article 226 should not be abused by individuals who purport to fight for justice while acting for personal or ulterior motives.”
Published – Jul 02, 2026 08:48 am IST