Contempt plea against ‘Savukku’ Shankar | Madras High Court directs him to submit explanation

0
8

[ad_1]

YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar

YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

The Madras High Court on Monday, March 18, 2024, ordered notice to ‘Savukku’ Shankar alias A. Shankar and directed him to submit a detailed explanation to a contempt of court petition filed against him by real estate firm G Square.

Justice K. Kumaresh Babu sought the explanation, in the form of an affidavit, after senior counsel E. Omprakash, representing the realtor, accused the alleged contemnor of having wilfully violated the judge’s June 26, 2023 order.

The realtor had initially filed a civil suit against the contemnor in 2022 accusing Mr. Shankar of throwing wild allegations on social media to gain cheap publicity and to make a living out of such sensational and false news. Claiming that 28 property bookings worth ₹15.16 crore had been cancelled due to such statements, the realtor had obtained an interim injunction restraining Mr. Shankar from making defamatory statements against the firm.

Subsequently, when the contemnor filed an application in 2023 to vacate the injunction, Justice Babu, prima facie, found the applicant to have made a couple of statements recklessly without proper verification of facts. Nevertheless, the judge modified the injunction in June 2023 and stated that the applicant should not publish any statement against G Square without sending an e-mail to it and waiting for its response for 72 hours.

If the statements to be made were based upon only public records, including court records, then the applicant was given liberty to make a fair comment or criticism on the basis of the material available in the public domain.

However, Mr. Omprakash complained to the court on Monday that the contemnor had gone about making reckless allegations against the realtor once again without sending any email as directed by the court, and therefore, this action amounted to wilful disobedience of court orders.

The senior counsel urged the High Court to punish the contemnor for his actions and recalled that he had already been found guilty in a suo motu criminal contempt initiated by the court.

[ad_2]

Source link