Darshan Thoogudeepa has been placed at a disadvantage after the Supreme Court of India revealed the actor would likely not receive immediate bail due to the prolonged trial process and pending examination of key witnesses in the alleged Renukaswamy murder case.
Darshan’s bail petition was heard before a two-judge bench, which comprised Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Vijay Bishnoi. This resulted in fierce back-and-forth between defence and prosecution on the protracted trial and jail conditions faced by the Kannada actor.
Rohatgi, a senior lawyer, appearing on behalf of Darshan, contended that the actor has been jailed since the Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted earlier by the Karnataka High Court in August. Rohatgi asserted that Darshan had not even received a limited number of basic facilities in prison, and said the actor was still confined to a quarantine cell.
Defence claimed that while other prisoners were free to communicate with their family members, policemen were supposedly even seen to watch over Darshan with family members, which brought discomfort and distress to him. Yet the bench strongly reacted, declaring that prison authorities had provided records which showed that Darshan had been provided all minimum facilities as per jail regulations.
The judges also commented upon the fact that he had been allowed family visits roughly 70 times. The Supreme Court additionally asked why Darshan continued to be confined to a quarantine cell and to provide a rationale for the delayed questioning of witnesses in the trial court.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the prosecution, said at the hearing that there were 272 witnesses in all. He said only 10 witnesses had been examined over the past seven months, since charges were framed on Nov. 3. There are almost 150 witnesses to date who are not yet being interviewed, among whom are 60 key witnesses with testimony that is believed to hold great weight in a murder trial, the prosecution said.
Luthra requested that the examination of these key witnesses be completed in one year. Rohatgi complained that this delay occurred and that even direct eyewitnesses had not yet been examined, despite having been for a few months. In reply, Luthra made a sharp remark in court, saying that if he detailed some questions arising out of the witnesses, it could have adverse effects on Darshan’s bail plea.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with the slowing down of proceedings in the lower court of the 57th CCH Court. The bench noted that evidence and witness examinations should not be delayed for mere pretrial delay and requested law enforcement to hasten prosecution efforts.
Importantly, the court gave the prosecution one year to finish the examination of the 60 key witnesses. The bench found that if most critical witnesses were not examined during the time stated, Darshan's bail plea could be re-evaluated subsequently.
The order essentially makes it so that the Kannada actor would have to spend a long time in jail, barring significant advances in the trial process. The case has attracted massive public and media attention throughout Karnataka.
