The Bengaluru City Civil and Sessions Court has reserved its verdict until October 9, 2025, on a plea seeking contempt proceedings against Parappana Agrahara Central Jail authorities for allegedly failing to provide minimum facilities to actor and accused Darshan, as mandated by the court in the Renukaswamy murder case in Chitradurga.

Darshan had filed a petition urging the court to recommend contempt of court action against jail officials for not complying with the court’s order to provide basic amenities as per the prison manual. Additionally, he submitted another application requesting the court to direct jail authorities to furnish details on which prisoners have been placed in quarantine cells, and the duration of their stay in such cells.Also Read: Bihar Final Electoral Roll 2025: Key Highlights from Special Intensive Revision (SIR): 7.24 crore electors after initial deletions of 65 lakh names.

Previously, as per the court’s earlier directive, Jail Superintendent Suresh appeared in person and submitted a written explanation detailing the facilities provided to Darshan. During the hearing, Special Public Prosecutor Prasanna Kumar, representing the jail authorities, argued, “All facilities permissible under the prison manual have been provided, including telephone access, video conferencing, blankets, bedsheets, a pillow, a plate, and a tumbler. However, Darshan’s request for a cot is not allowed under the manual. He also asked for space to walk, and we’ve permitted one hour in the morning and evening within the available space. But demands like a specific barrack or sunlight cannot be claimed as fundamental rights. Not all fundamental rights are available to prisoners.”BULLMER Striped Textured Printed Polo Neck Fullsleeve T-Shirt with Rib for Men

In response, Darshan’s lawyer, Sunil Kumar, countered, “Darshan isn’t asking for a golden cot—just a bed and a pillow. Rules that are not enforced across the country are being imposed on him. There’s a clear disparity in treatment. Notorious rapist Umesh Reddy was given a room with a color TV and other privileges, but Darshan has been denied even basic facilities.”

The court remarked, “Jail authorities are also responsible for the safety of the accused. Shouldn’t they ensure that? The court cannot interfere in matters of law and order maintenance.” After hearing arguments from Darshan’s counsel and counterarguments from Special Public Prosecutor P. Prasanna Kumar, representing the jail authorities, the 57th Additional City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru reserved its judgment for October 9.