Madras High Court Initiates Suo Motu Contempt Against YouTuber Felix Gerald Over Savukku Shankar Interview

Justice K Kumaresh Babu opined that Gerald, who had interviewed Shankar post the court order, had also committed contempt of court. The court thus ordered notice to Gerald and called upon him to explain as to why he should not be proceeded against for contempt of court.

“Hence, as this Court is of the view that the host has also committed Contempt of the orders of this Court, the host, namely, Felix Gerald, is suo-motu added as respondent/contemnor in the present Contempt Petition. Notice shall be issued to him, calling upon him to explain as to why he should not be proceeded against for contempt of Court,” the court said.

Background

G Square Realtors, a prominent real estate company had approached the Madras High Court seeking to restrain Shankar and his men from publishing any defamatory allegations and slanderous material against the company and to remove all the defamatory videos and tweets that were made by Shankar against the company. The company had also sought damages to the tune of Rs. 1,00,10,000 (One Crore and ten thousand) from Shankar.

When the suit was taken up, the court noted that the defamatory statements would prima facie affect the normal course of business and were on based on facts. The court had thus ordered injunction against Shankar.

Later, Shankar filed an application seeking to vacate the injunction order. He argued that the statements made by him were not defamatory but were justified truth and were fair comment.

The court, however, noted that though Shankar claimed to verify the statements made by him before publication, he had not produced any details of his verification. The court noted that the statements were made without verification and Shankar had not called upon the real estate company before making statement against it to verify whether it was true.

The court thus modified its earlier injunction order and directed Shankar not to publish any statement in social media or public platform regarding the activities of the company without causing them a notice. The court added that if any response was received within 72 hours, Shankar could make a statement and should also publish the response received by the company. However, if no response was received, he could proceed with publishing the article. The court also added that if the statements are based upon public records, Shankar was at liberty to make a fair comment/criticism based on the materials.

Following this order, the company filed a contempt petition alleging that Shankar had violated the court order. The company argued that Shankar had interpreted the order to mean a different view. It was submitted that Shankar, in an interview, had expressed that if a question was put to him regarding G Square, whether it would be possible for him to immediately answer or wait for 72 hours to give an answer. The court observed that such an interpretation by Shankar was a violation of its order.

“This Court in its order had specifically directed the Contemnor to make statements with regard to the applicant only after giving a notice to him and await response from the applicant and no response is received, the Contemnor is at liberty to make a statement. When such is the categorical direction that has been issued, to the Contemnor, the understanding of the Contemnor whether he has to wait for 72 hrs for a question that have been put up to him is in direct violation of the order passed against him,” the court said.

The court noted that the host of the interview, Gerald, had also expressed his view that the order could not be understood in such a manner and had thus committed contempt of court order. The court thus initiated suo motu contempt proceeding against Shankar.