Stories
Darshan Case: Explosive Claims Against Pradosh's Attempt to Become Approver
- •In the Renukaswamy murder case, Darshan's legal team has objected to Pradosh recording a confessional statement, leading to further court developments.
- •Senior advocate Hashmath Pasha, representing Darshan, argued that Pradosh filed an application for a confessional statement on August 5, which the prosecution accepted without stating its necessity.
- •Pasha alleged that Pradosh illegally used a mobile phone in jail, speaking unauthorizedly under another inmate's name (Vishnuvardhan) to attempt becoming an approver.
- •The High Court judge stated that the credibility of the approver can be questioned and Darshan's counsel has the right to cross-examine him.
- •Pasha cited a Supreme Court order, arguing that Pradosh exploited another inmate's opportunity, and questioned the prosecution's claim of his cooperation when the investigation is already complete.
Key Questions Answered
Senior advocate Hashmath Pasha argued that co-accused Pradosh illegally used a mobile phone in jail under a released inmate's name to speak unauthorizedly, and then attempted to become an approver. He also pointed out that the prosecution failed to state why a confessional statement is necessary.
Justice V. Shrishananda stated that the defense has every right to cross-examine the approver and question his credibility. The judge noted that the defense can expose the approver's true situation and question what he was doing until now.
A case has been registered against Pradosh and an employee named Mounesh after it was discovered that Pradosh used a mobile phone illegally since July, registering his wife's phone number under a released inmate named Vishnuvardhan.
