Sat Aug 02 05:42:20 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary of the provided text, followed by a rewritten news article:
**Summary:**
The Madras High Court issued an interim injunction against YouTuber ‘Savukku’ Shankar, preventing him from making defamatory statements against Additional Director General of Police (Law & Order) S. Davidson Devasirvatham. The ADGP filed a defamation suit, accusing Shankar of spreading false and misleading information regarding the alleged custodial death of B. Ajith Kumar. The court agreed that Shankar’s statements could damage the ADGP’s reputation, especially considering his high office. The ADGP’s affidavit detailed a history of alleged harassment and defamation by Shankar, including past accusations related to a fake passport scam. The ADGP also highlighted the dangers of social media influencers spreading unverified information for sensationalism and political gain.
**News Article:**
**Madras High Court Gag Order Silences YouTuber Over Custodial Death Allegations**
**CHENNAI, August 2, 2025 (The Hindu) -** The Madras High Court has issued an interim injunction against controversial YouTuber A. Shankar, known as ‘Savukku’ Shankar, barring him from making further defamatory statements about Additional Director General of Police (Law and Order) S. Davidson Devasirvatham. The order comes in response to a defamation suit filed by the ADGP concerning allegations made by Shankar related to the death of B. Ajith Kumar while in police custody in Sivaganga district this past June.
Justice K. Kumaresh Babu granted the injunction, effective for four weeks, after hearing arguments that Shankar’s claims were based on unverified gossip and presented as fact to mislead the public and damage the ADGP’s reputation. The court agreed that such statements, especially considering the ADGP’s position, could be damaging.
In his legal filing, ADGP Devasirvatham outlined a history of alleged harassment by Shankar, including a 2022 smear campaign linking him to a fake passport scam. He argued that while he initially chose not to respond publicly, Shankar’s recent accusations following the custodial death were too egregious to ignore. The ADGP stated that Shankar’s claims, presented with a false sense of insider knowledge, were entirely fabricated and lacked any factual basis.
The ADGP’s suit also raised concerns about the broader issue of online misinformation, accusing Shankar of exploiting social media platforms to spread sensationalist narratives for personal gain. He argued that such “digital influencers” operate without the ethical and legal constraints faced by accredited journalists, potentially causing significant harm to individuals and institutions. The suit also sought a “John Doe” order to prevent further defamation by unidentified individuals online.
This case highlights the growing tension between freedom of speech on the internet and the need to protect individuals from defamation in an era of viral social media.
First Piper 