The Karnataka High Court has ordered the re-transfer of Pradosh S Rao, one of the accused in the Renukaswamy murder case, from the Belagavi Central Prison back to the Central Prison in Bengaluru. This case also implicates Kannada actor Darshan Thoogudeepa Srinivas.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over a single-judge bench, ruled in favor of Pradosh S Rao’s petition and overturned a previous magistrate court order that had authorized his transfer to Belagavi Central Prison.
The murder case revolves around allegations that Renukaswamy died from injuries inflicted on Darshan Thoogudeepa’s instructions, following derogatory social media comments about the actor’s girlfriend, Pavithra Gowda, who is also an accused in the case. Darshan and several others accused in the case are currently in custody.
Recently, media images emerged showing Darshan inside the prison with a notorious convict, Wilsongarden Naga, smoking and drinking tea. These images sparked public outrage, prompting jail authorities to request the transfer of several accused, including Pradosh Rao, to various prisons across Karnataka. The magistrate court accepted this request, citing concerns that the media exposure could damage public confidence in the justice system and discourage witnesses.
Pradosh Rao challenged this decision, arguing that there was no evidence linking him to any illegal activities within the prison. He maintained that he had been housed separately from Darshan and was unaware of the events involving him. Additionally, Rao raised concerns about the harsh conditions he faced after his transfer, including being placed in an “Andheri Cell,” where he spent long hours in darkness under constant surveillance, which he claimed amounted to psychological torture.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna criticized the authorities for placing an under-trial prisoner in such conditions, stating that it is “unknown to law” unless extreme circumstances justify it. The court also emphasized that the transfer of under-trial prisoners cannot be done arbitrarily, stressing that such decisions must be based on sound reasoning and judicial consideration.
The High Court further noted that if anyone should have been transferred, it should have been Darshan, who was directly involved in the controversy, rather than Pradosh Rao, who had no connection to the incident.
In its ruling, the court referenced the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Maharashtra v. Saeed Sohail Sheikh, which held that the transfer of under-trial prisoners requires a fair process and a proper hearing. The High Court concluded that the magistrate had failed to apply his mind before issuing the transfer order.
As a result, the court quashed the magistrate’s August 27 order and directed the immediate return of Pradosh Rao to the Central Prison in Bengaluru.
Advocates Hitesh Gowda BJ, Aditya D, and Santosh V represented Pradosh Rao, while Special Public Prosecutor BA Belliappa and Additional Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesha appeared on behalf of the respondent authorities.
