Advertisement
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) P. Prasanna Kumar argued against Darshan’s bail, citing multiple pieces of evidence and the gravity of the crime. According to the prosecution, Renukaswamy was deceitfully lured, kidnapped, and brutally assaulted, leading to his death.
The SPP alleged that Darshan actively participated in the assault, citing eyewitness accounts and forensic evidence. It was claimed that Darshan attacked Renukaswamy, accusing him of messaging his wife, and inflicted severe injuries, including blows to sensitive areas.
The prosecution highlighted that Renukaswamy’s blood was found on Darshan’s shoes and clothes, as well as at the crime scene. Post-mortem reports revealed 17 broken ribs, 13 blood wounds, and injuries to vital organs.
Related Articles
Advertisement
The SPP also countered the argument that the case did not qualify as a kidnapping, referencing previous High Court rulings and Supreme Court guidelines.
Darshan’s counsel, C.V. Nagesh, refuted the prosecution’s claims, arguing that:– The actor has complied with all conditions of his interim bail and did not misuse it.
– Darshan’s medical condition, requiring surgery, necessitated the extension of his bail. The defense presented five medical certificates, stating that preparations for surgery were underway, with the procedure scheduled for December 11.
– The injuries on Renukaswamy could not have caused the blood splatter claimed by the prosecution. The defense also questioned delays in recording statements from key witnesses and inconsistencies in the forensic reports. After hearing both sides, the court reserved its judgment on the bail application and extended Darshan’s interim bail until the next hearing. This extension allows him to proceed with his scheduled surgery.