.jpg)
Additionally, the Court cautioned against giving the accused special treatment while they are incarcerated.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court revoked the bail that the Karnataka High Court had given Kannada actors Darshan Thoogudeepa and Pavithra Gowda, along with five other individuals, in the Renukaswamy murder case.
The Karnataka government appealed the High Court's ruling, and a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan issued the ruling.
"The order is set aside, and the bail granted to the accused is set aside," the judge ruled.
The Bench ruled that the High Court's judgment was perverse and that the trial court had the right to hear witness statements.
"A mechanical exercise of power is reflected in the High Court's order... The Supreme Court decided that granting bail would affect the trial and could sway the witnesses.
"Justice Mahadevan rendered a highly knowledgeable ruling. It cannot be described. It sends the message that the accused is subject to the law regardless of their size. It conveys a clear message that the rule of law must always be upheld by the justice delivery system at all levels. There is no man above or below the law. And when we follow it, we don't ask anyone's permission. Maintaining the rule of law at all times is vital," Justice Pardiwala continued.
Additionally, the Court cautioned against giving the accused special treatment while they are incarcerated.
"The day we come to know that the accused persons are being provided 5-star treatment, the first step would be to place the superintendent into suspension along with all other officials," the court stated.
On June 9, the body of Renukaswamy, a 33-year-old car driver, was discovered. He is said to have died as a result of wounds he received in an attack that was carried out under Darshan's direction.
According to reports, the actor urged his followers to confront and abduct Renukaswamy for disparaging Pavithra Gowda on social media.
Due to medical reasons, the High Court granted him six weeks of temporary bail on October 30 of last year.
On December 13, 2024, it subsequently granted Darshan, Pavithra, and five other accused individuals regular bail.
Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, a single judge, stated that the prosecution had not given the accused any reason to be arrested.
The judge referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of journalist and editor Prabir Purkayastha, in which the court made it clear that the reasons for an arrest were not the same as the grounds for an arrest, and that the police had to give each arrested person the grounds of arrest unique to their case so they could have a fair opportunity to defend themselves and request bail.
The High Court in this case observed that the accused had received reasons for arrest from the prosecution after the fact. Furthermore, it said that the grounds for arrest were all the same rather than having information unique to each accused person.
The State then challenged the bail order in a Supreme Court motion.
The plea was submitted through Krishna & Nishani Law Chambers to the Supreme Court on January 6.
This website is all about sharing knowledge and updating everything about Law.
