The Supreme Court has declined to grant interim bail to Kannada Actor Darshan in the high-profile Renukaswamy murder case, but observed that the actor would be at liberty to seek bail again if there is no “substantial progress” in the trial within one year.
Actor Darshan is among the principal accused in the 2024 murder of Renukaswamy, a 33-year-old fan from Chitradurga who was allegedly abducted and killed after sending obscene messages to actor Pavithra Gowda, a close associate of Darshan. The prosecution alleges that Renukaswamy was kidnapped, assaulted and murdered in Bengaluru in June 2024. Darshan, Pavithra Gowda and several others are facing charges including murder, conspiracy and kidnapping.
A Bench of Justices J. B. Pardiwala and Vijay Bishnoi noted that charges were framed on November 3, 2025, and in the last seven months, the prosecution had examined only 10 witnesses. The Court recorded that while the State proposed to examine around 60 “vital” witnesses on priority basis, the chargesheet cited 272 witnesses, of whom approximately 150 may ultimately be examined. Expressing concern over the pace of proceedings, the Bench observed:
“We are of the view that the progress insofar as trial is concerned is very slow.”
The Court said that if the trial continued at the present pace, “it is going to take a long time even before the 60 important witnesses are examined.” The Bench accordingly directed the trial court to ensure regular examination of witnesses and stated that, if necessary, the trial could proceed on a day-to-day basis.
At the same time, the Court directed the defence to cooperate in expeditious completion of the trial and asked the State to make all efforts to ensure that at least the 60 key witnesses are examined within one year.
The Bench also dealt with Darshan’s grievance regarding prison conditions. The Karnataka government placed on record an affidavit stating that the actor was being provided interview and phone-call facilities, medical assistance, diet, recreational facilities and other amenities in accordance with prison rules and trial court directions.
Recording the State’s assurance, the Court observed that Darshan must continue to be provided all basic amenities available to any undertrial prisoner under the Jail Manual.
The Supreme Court further noted that the Presiding Officer of the trial court was functioning with an additional charge because the regular court was vacant, and requested the Karnataka High Court to address the issue administratively at the earliest.
Disposing of the writ petition, the Bench clarified that if there is no substantial progress in the trial over the next year, Darshan would be free to renew his plea for bail before the trial court.
Appearances
For Petitioner- Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ranjeeta Rohatgi, AOR Mr. Jackie Minish S, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar S., Adv. Mr. Lakshmikanth G., Adv. Mr. Yuvraj Kashyap, Adv.
For Respondent- Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. D.L.chidanand, Adv. Mr. Sanchit Garga, AOR Mr. Sachin C, Adv. Mr. Kunal Rana, Adv. Mr. Shashwat Jaiswal, Adv. Ms. Diksha Arora, Adv.
