A court hearing the Renukaswamy murder case on Tuesday deferred recording the statement of accused No. 14, Pradosh S, until August 18. Pradosh is seeking pardon and approver status in exchange for disclosing what he knows about the killing.
His 11-page petition alleges that actor Darshan and other accused brutally assaulted Renukaswamy at a shed, beating him with sticks and a nylon rope, kicking him and pressing down on his chest before allegedly devising a plan to conceal the killing.
Darshan and Pavithra Gowda appeared before the court by video conference as lawyers argued over when Pradosh’s statement should be recorded.
“Pradosh’s lawyer, Diwakar, sought an early recording of the statement, arguing that the case involved kidnapping, murder and an attempt to destroy evidence. He said any delay could create a possibility of influencing the proceedings. He also sought separate security for Pradosh in jail,” said a police officer in the know.
Darshan’s lawyer, Hashmath Pasha, opposed the request, saying the defence had an opportunity to challenge the Sessions Court’s August 10 order before the High Court.
“The court deferred recording the statement until August 18,” the officer added.
{{/usCountry}}“The court deferred recording the statement until August 18,” the officer added.
{{/usCountry}}Pradosh’s petition gives a detailed account of the alleged assault on Renukaswamy after he was brought to a shed on June 8, 2024. Pradosh said he had known Darshan since 2003.
According to the application, Darshan confronted Renukaswamy over obscene messages and photographs purportedly sent to Pavithra Gowda before abusing and assaulting him. Pradosh claims he saw blood coming from Renukaswamy’s head and intervened more than once, warning that he could die if the assault continued.
The petition alleges that Pavithra Gowda was asked to confront Renukaswamy and hit him with a slipper. Renukaswamy was then stripped to his underwear and allegedly attacked by Nandish, Pavan and Nagaraj with wooden sticks and a nylon rope.
Pradosh alleges that Nandish lifted Renukaswamy and attempted to hang him from a Tata Ace vehicle. Nagaraj allegedly continued striking him with the rope while Nandish and Pavan used wooden sticks.
Darshan allegedly took the rope and struck Renukaswamy several times on his hands and back while messages from his mobile phone were read aloud. The petition alleges that Renukaswamy was later stripped completely and repeatedly kicked by Darshan in his private parts.
Pradosh claims he intervened again after Renukaswamy collapsed. The application alleges that even after food and water were provided, Darshan kicked him on the neck and chest. It further alleges that Darshan stood with both feet on Renukaswamy’s chest and pressed down until Pradosh pulled him away.
The petition also alleges that the accused tried to conceal the death and create an alternative account of what happened.
Pradosh claims Darshan threatened to kill himself with a gun unless he helped deal with the aftermath. Those involved allegedly discussed whether the people who had brought Renukaswamy to the shed should surrender to police, but instead considered creating a different version of events.
According to the application, the group later went to Darshan’s residence, where Vinay allegedly told Darshan that Raghavendra had agreed to surrender and that more people could be arranged.
Pradosh alleges that Darshan returned with a bag of cash and gave ₹5 lakh to Nagaraj and ₹10 lakh to Vinay. The group allegedly planned for Raghavendra, Karthik alias Kappe and Nikhil to surrender and claim that Renukaswamy had been brought from Chitradurga over a monetary dispute and killed during a quarrel. They were allegedly assured bail.
The petition further alleges that the body was moved from the original location. A place near Sumanahalli was identified and the body was allegedly transported in a white Scorpio after another driver refused to help.
The vehicle’s front and rear number plates were allegedly removed before the body was dumped in a drain near Sumanahalli, in an effort to make it appear that the killing had occurred elsewhere.
Pradosh has told the court he is prepared to make a “full and true disclosure” of all facts within his knowledge about the murder and the roles of the other accused.
The prosecution has said it has no objection to pardon if Pradosh makes a truthful disclosure. It has also cited concerns over witnesses turning hostile, saying two witnesses had changed their testimony at a crucial stage and another eyewitness could do so.
On Monday, the Sessions Court ruled that Darshan and the other accused could not file objections to Pradosh’s pardon application. Judge Sujatha M. Sambhrani said the proceedings concerned Pradosh, the prosecution and the court.
The court said the order did not decide whether Pradosh would ultimately receive pardon and that the other accused would retain their right to defend themselves and cross-examine him if he became an approver.
Pradosh was the first accused to seek pardon in exchange for approver status. Accused Nos. 8 and 10, Ravi Shankar and Vinay, later filed similar applications.