Karnataka High Court Issues Notice To Centre On Actor Darshan's Plea Alleging 'Brazen' Media Trial In Renukaswamy Murder Case Despite Injunctions

The Karnataka High Court has issued notice to the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting (MIB) as well as the Ministry of Electronics & Information Technology (MeitY) on a plea filed by Kannada actor Darshan Srinivas, alleging inaction against media houses and digital intermediaries circulating 'defamatory content' against him and conducting 'media trial' in connection with Renukaswamy murder case.A single judge bench of Justice Sachin Shanker Magadum has posted the matter for April 06. On April 01, the Court was told by the petitioner's counsel, Adv. Pratham N, that the media houses have been violating five previous injunction orders in favour of Darshan.The plea filed by the actor alleges that MeitY and MIB have refused to act upon the 'Brazen Media Trial' undertaken by media houses pursuant to the registration of FIR post the death of Renukaswamy. Darshan, in his plea, states that the media has 'maliciously' distorted the facts of the case and built their own narrative of the police investigation through a fully fledged social media campaign. This has continued despite several injnction orders given by the trial court as well as the High Court, states the actor.In WP No. 24836/2024, a coordinate bench of the Karnataka High Court had restrained media houses from 'publishing, printing, airing and disseminating confidential information contained in the charge sheet' in relation to Crime No. 0250/2024. The court had also directed the Union of India to pass an order restraining the media agencies and news channels from publishing, broadcasting, printing and disseminating confidential information contained in the chargesheet pending adjudication before the concerned court.Darshan alleges that a plethora of news channels like The Republic TV (Kannada), TV9 (Kannada), Public TV (Kannada), and others have routinely violated the injunction orders passed by the courts on the same issue. He seeks the court's intervention to make the central government act on his January 2026 complaint that lists out all the controversial content against him and his family, including nearly 1000 YouTube and Meta links. He also seeks issuance of show cause notice to all the erring media channels under Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks Act.The Kannada actor accuses the media of transforming the sub‑judice murder trial into a 'macabre spectacle' to boost TRP and ad revenue, causing 'irreparable harm' to his right to a fair trial under Article 21.“The Media Channels, in guise of Fair Journalism, are making attempts to blur the lines between justice and entertainment, potentially compromising the presumption of innocence and fair legal proceedings, thereby conducting a media trial”, the petition adds.The media channels have earned crores of rupees from TRP and views by exploiting the personal and family life of the actor, even though they have violated the ethical code of journalism in the name of 'free speech and expression', adds Darshan. The incidents connected to the case have been converted into a 'macabre spectacle'. The channels and media portals have amassed millions of views from exclusive interviews, dissecting the merits of the case, 'venomous' interviews with witnesses hostile to the actor, divulging 'confidential' chargesheet information, exclusive live coverage of court proceedings and depiction of 'raw moments', and utilisation of AI animations to recreate horrific acts of violence, the plea submits further. The media has even went to the extent of accusing Darshan of an extra marital affair with the co-accused actress Kavya Gowda. Some versions even belittle the actor's fans as 'D-Gang' which is equivalent to 'a criminal syndicate', it adds.These alleged acts of media houses have deprived the actor of his right to equality and the right to a free and fair trial, the petition states.The petitioner has also invoked Rule 6 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 (Programme Code), which prohibits content that is defamatory, amounts to contempt of court, or criticises individuals in a slanderous manner. To assert the responsibility of the intermediaries, he has also relied on Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, r/w Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, which mandates intermediaries to remove or disable access to unlawful information within 36 hours upon receiving a court order or government notification.The actor is accused of being involved in the killing of his 33-year-old 'fan' over sending obscene messages to actress Pavithra Gowda. Darshan had allegedly abducted the deceased from Chitradurga and had him tortured for three days in a shed in Bengaluru in June 2024. The deceased later succumbed to the abuse, with his body thrown out in a drain as per the police report. Darshan and 16 others have been charged for offences punishable under Section 120B, (Conspiracy), 201 (destruction of evidence), 364 (Abduction/kidnapping), 302 (murder)...

Karnataka High Court Issues Notice To Centre On Actor Darshan's Plea Alleging 'Brazen' Media Trial In Renukaswamy Murder Case Despite Injunctions

Sebin James

Tags