Supreme Court to examine whether FIRs against Savukku Shankar can be clubbed

The Supreme Court on Friday asked the State of Tamil Nadu whether the First Information Reports (FIRs) pending against YouTuber Savukku Shankar can be clubbed [A Shankar @ Savukku Shankar v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors]..A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra also asked the State to submit a short note regarding his latest detention order. "We will have it on Monday," the Court said.."You are after this man": Supreme Court to TN govt for repeatedly detaining YouTuber Savukku Shankar.The Bench was hearing petitions challenging FIRs against him and also assailing his preventive detention by the Tamil Nadu Police under the Goondas Act, days after the Madras High Court quashed earlier preventive detention orders against him.As per reports, the latest detention order was passed on allegations that drugs were found in Shankar's possession.The earlier preventive detention order (passed in May) had cited, among other grounds, defamatory comments that were allegedly made by Shankar against women in an interview given to another YouTuber Felix Jerald.The High Court had eventually ordered his release in that case but he was then detained again in the ganja matter.Meanwhile, FIRs were registered against him and he approached the Supreme Court to quash the same.His mother separately filed Habeas Corpus petition challenging his detention.The top court on August 14 granted the YouTuber interim relief in the matter by staying any further coercive action in the FIRs and slammed the Tamil Nadu government for repeatedly detaining him..Today, the top court asked Shankar's counsel why he cannot approach the High Court first for quashing of the FIRs. The counsel said the High Court was taking a lot of time."In entire India 51% detenues come from Tamil Nadu. There is rampant misuse of the Act. I challenge the order of detention and then High Court adjourned my case as well as they have a huge pendency," Senior Advocate Balaji Srinivasan submitted.The Court then asked the State to inform it whether the FIRs were related to one interview."If it is, then it is a fit case of clubbing," CJI Chandrachud said.Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing the State, submitted that one of them was distinct."The distinct one we will not club. Take a look at the detention order and tell us ... one day he is released and then again detained," CJI Chandrachud said.Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, who also represented the State, said he would examine the FIRs and apprise the Court on next date of hearing. The Court then adjourned the matter to next week..The Tamil Nadu government was represented by Senior Advocates Sidharth Luthra and Mukul Rohatgi. Shankar was represented by Advocate Balaji Srinivasan.