Bengaluru: Former Congress MP and actor Ramya welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision to cancel the bail of actor Darshan Thogudipa in the Renukaswamy murder case.
Talking with ANI, Ramya said, “I appreciate the Supreme Court’s decision. Everyone is the same before the law. It sends a message to the public that on a large scale everyone is the same before the law. The law will take its curriculum, and justice will be given.”
A bench of Justices R. Mahadevan and JB Pardiwala found that the Karnataka High Court had granted bail to philosophy by ignoring serious evidence and relying on insufficient basis contrary to the establishment of legal principles in murder cases.
Also read Two Renukaswamy case after actor Ramya receives threats
“The only filing of the charge sheet, the existence of a long list of witnesses, or the possibility of delay in testing, cannot constitute legitimate reasons to dilute the gravity of crime or to disregard the case imposed by the prosecution”, the court has mentioned in its classification.
Additionally, the apex court mentioned that, according to the records, Darshan made clear efforts to intervene in the investigation, including co-involved persons to be involved in arranging false surrender, paying to hide the crime, and taking advantage of the connection with the police to manipulate the FIR and postmortem process.
The court said, “CCTV footage is also evidence of the removal of another accused from the residence of another accused and the ongoing influence on the prosecution witnesses, as displayed from public appearance after bail on the Kannada actor’s part,” the court said.
“The appellant alleged that the A2 is not only misusing Liberty Post-Bell, but is the mastermind of efforts to derail the investigation,” said this.
Finally, the court found that in the current case, the High Court, without a consistent or legitimate logic, granted bail to actor philosophy based on contradictory conclusions. ,
Also read East-Mis Russia runner-up Kseniya Alexandrova dies in tragic car accident, 4 months after marriage
HC admitted to bail (philosophy), saying he was not present at the crime site, but at the same time, he admitted that he was in telephonic contact with other accused at a significant time. It was also noted that there was no strong purpose, while also accepting enmity and pre-sensation with the deceased, “said the top-court.
In particular, the top-court also emphasized that popularity and social status cannot justify bail when there is a real risk for investigation or testing. It was also noted that in this case, the High Court erased the Darshan’s celebrity status as a mitigation factor, despite the misuse of prison privileges, political impact and evidence of the ability to reduce the justice system.
“Popularity cannot be a shield for impurities. As this court has been held, impact, resource and social status cannot form a basis for bail, where there is a real risk of bias for investigation or testing … In particular, celebrities serve as a social role model – not more accountable. The society is not much. The society reduces the message and the trust of the public,” the court said.