HC reserves order on plea against actor Darshan’s bail

The Karnataka high court on Monday examined the regular bail plea of actor Darshan Thoogudeepa, accused in the murder of his fan and auto driver Renukaswamy, and ordered that the interim bail granted to Darshan for medical reasons will remain in effect.

Special public prosecutor (SPP) P Prasanna Kumar strongly opposed Darshan’s bail, emphasising the brutality of the crime and the extensive evidence collected. Kumar argued that the case constituted “a clear violation under Section 302 of the IPC,” categorising it as murder rather than culpable homicide. He highlighted the severity of the victim’s injuries, which included “39 serious injuries,” “17 fractured ribs,” and wounds causing blood to ooze from the testicles.

Kumar presented a range of evidence, including forensic reports, witness statements, and digital data, placing Darshan and his co-accused at the crime scene. The prosecutor further alleged that Renukaswamy’s death stemmed from an assault orchestrated by Darshan, who reportedly instructed his supporters to abduct and attack the victim over derogatory comments made about co-accused Pavithra Gowda on social media.

Senior advocate CV Nagesh, representing Darshan, vehemently denied the prosecution’s claims, describing the evidence as fabricated. He questioned delays in several aspects of the investigation, including witness testimonies, the post-mortem examination, and the seizure of evidence from the alleged crime scene.

“All this talk about blood oozing out of the deceased’s testicles... and blood on the clothes of all 14 accused as if there was a blood fountain... is entirely concocted,” Nagesh stated. He dismissed the prosecution’s narrative as imaginary and insufficient to justify denying bail.

Nagesh also contested the framing of the crime as murder, suggesting it might align more with culpable homicide under Section 304 of the IPC. He argued that the victim had only one visible bleeding injury, contradicting the prosecution’s claims of extreme brutality.

Addressing accusations of misusing interim bail, Nagesh clarified that Darshan’s surgery timeline depended entirely on medical recommendations. “Only the doctors can decide when the surgery can be performed. I cannot force them to operate before the interim bail ends,” he said.

Justice Shetty, after hearing the arguments, reserved the decision on Darshan’s bail plea and stated that the interim bail granted to the actor on October 30 for medical treatment remains valid until the court delivers its verdict.

Darshan was granted a six-week interim bail on October 30 for medical reasons, citing severe spine pain and the need for urgent surgery. Home minister Parameshwara in the last week of November had questioned the legitimacy of the medical grounds for bail saying, “The actor’s lawyer argued that if the surgery wasn’t performed immediately, Darshan’s spine could break. Yet, no surgery has been carried out to date, and none appears necessary.”

Darshan has been in custody since June 11 on allegations related to the abduction and murder of Renukaswamy, a Chitradurga resident. According to police, the victim was detained, tortured in a shed in Pattanagere, and later found dead in a Sumanahalli drain. On September 4, investigators submitted a comprehensive 3,991-page charge sheet detailing the alleged abuse, which reportedly included electric shocks leading to shock and haemorrhage. Authorities noted that Renukaswamy had used a fake Instagram profile, “Gowtham,” to contact Pavithra Gowda, reportedly leading to the incident.

The prosecution claimed that Darshan and several associates retaliated after Renukaswamy sent offensive messages to Gowda, who likely had a long-term relationship with Darshan. Meanwhile, Darshan was shifted to Ballari prison after images surfaced showing him receiving preferential treatment at Bengaluru central prison.