Madras High Court Moves Against DVAC Chief Arun IPS: Savukku Shankar Seeks CBI Probe Over Repeatedly Quashed Detention Orders

June 20, 2026 : YouTuber and journalist A. Shankar, popularly known as Savukku Shankar, has approached the Madras High Court seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe against Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) Arun IPS. The plea relies on recent adverse observations made by the High Court against the officer while quashing a preventive detention order issued during his tenure as Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police.

In his writ petition, Shankar has referred to a Division Bench judgment that set aside a preventive detention order passed against realtor Santosh Sharma. According to the petition, the Bench found that the detention order had been issued for extraneous reasons and noted that similar detention orders passed by Arun under the Goondas Act had repeatedly been struck down by the High Court.

The petitioner submitted that the Court had concluded there was no material available to justify the invocation of preventive detention on the ground of threat to public order. The Bench further observed that Arun, having nearly three decades of policing experience, was fully aware of the legal requirements governing preventive detention and yet proceeded to pass the detention order.

Relying on these findings, Shankar argued that the judicial observations amount to a serious indictment of the manner in which preventive detention powers were exercised. He contended that the findings were not casual remarks but went directly to the legality, bona fides and propriety of actions affecting personal liberty protected under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.

The petition also highlights an earlier case in which another detention order passed by Arun was quashed by the High Court, with costs of ₹50,000 imposed on the State. According to Shankar, the repeated judicial criticism of such detention orders necessitates an independent and comprehensive investigation into the officer’s conduct.

Shankar further stated that despite the adverse judicial findings, neither the State Government nor the competent authorities have initiated any action against Arun. He informed the Court that representations were submitted to the concerned authorities, including the Vigilance Commissioner, seeking appropriate action, but no response was received.

The petition contends that the continued inaction of the State has created a reasonable apprehension that no fair, impartial or independent inquiry can be expected from State agencies. The concern, according to the petitioner, is heightened by the fact that Arun currently heads the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, the agency responsible for investigating allegations of corruption and misconduct against public servants.

Emphasizing the importance of public confidence in the administration of justice and accountability mechanisms, Shankar argued that failure to act despite clear judicial findings could undermine trust in the rule of law. He therefore urged the High Court to direct a CBI investigation into the allegations and to require the agency to submit its report before the Court for consideration of appropriate further action.