New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment over the petition questioning the granting of bail to Kannada superstar Darshan in the sensational fan murder case, following the completion of arguments and counterarguments.
During the proceedings, the bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan once again expressed strong reservations about the Karnataka High Court’s order granting bail to the actor. “We won’t repeat the High Court’s mistake,” it remarked.
Counsels have been directed to submit their written arguments, limited to three pages, within a week. The verdict is expected to be pronounced within ten days.
The bench questioned the Karnataka High Court’s application of judicial discretion, stating: “Our concern is that judicious discretion was not applied in the order while granting bail to Darshan. The order has pained us. We can understand if a trial court judge errs, but how can we agree with the reasoning cited by the High Court judge?”
The bench also expressed surprise over a photograph showing Darshan with other accused persons. “We thought the photo was taken casually. What kind of people are these? Is it possible to pose for a photo like this after committing a murder?” it asked.
The apex court further questioned why forensic and circumstantial evidence was not given due weight, and why the statements of two eyewitnesses were not considered credible. “There are serious charges of criminal conspiracy and murder, including kidnapping. How can this evidence be ignored?” the bench asked.
“We are not deciding the punishment for the accused, nor are we clearing him of charges. We won’t repeat High Court’s mistakes,” the bench clarified.
Senior counsel Siddharth Dave, representing actor Darshan, argued that during the inspection of the crime scene, no blood traces were found, yet the forensic report later claimed traces of blood were detected. “None of these findings are reliable. The clothes were seized three days after the incident. There is also suspicion regarding the accused Punith’s 12-day disappearance. If he intended to make a statement, he would have done so the very next day,” he submitted.
Dave also claimed that the statements of eyewitnesses were questionable and argued that while the High Court’s language might not have been ideal, its order was appropriate.
Meanwhile, counsel for the prime accused, Pavithra Gowda, argued that she did not cause any injury to the victim. “The statement only says she beat the victim with chappals,” the counsel said.
The bench questioned the motive behind Pavithra Gowda making 55 calls to accused number three, Pavan. The counsel responded that Pavan was her cook, and the calls were related to his work.
On July 22, the Supreme Court had already expressed strong dissatisfaction with the Karnataka High Court’s order. Addressing senior counsel Kapil Sibal, the bench had said: “To be very honest, we are not convinced with the manner in which the High Court exercised its discretion.”
Darshan, currently in Thailand shooting for his film ‘Devil’, is expected to return to Bengaluru on Friday (July 25).
Advocate Ranganath, representing accused number six Anukumar and accused number seven Jagadish, told the media that the Supreme Court bench heard arguments from all sides, including the prosecution. “The court has directed us to submit written arguments within a week. The verdict will be delivered thereafter,” he said.
Darshan, Pavithra Gowda, and 15 others were arrested on June 11, 2024, on charges of kidnapping and brutally murdering Renukaswamy, a fan from Chitradurga.
(IANS)
