Karnataka High Court Questions Whether Judges Can Be Swayed By Films As Darshan Challenges BOSS Release Over Fair Trial Concerns

The matter came before a single-judge bench of Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, who sharply questioned whether the argument implied that judges themselves could be influenced by a movie, according to Bar & Bench.

Background: How We Got Here

Darshan Thoogudeepa, one of Kannada cinema’s most prominent actors, is accused alongside actress Pavithra Gowda and 15 others in the abduction and murder of 33-year-old Renukaswamy, who allegedly sent obscene messages to Gowda.

Renukaswamy was allegedly held in a Bengaluru shed, tortured, and found dead on June 9, 2024. Darshan was arrested on June 11, 2024. The criminal trial is currently proceeding on a day-to-day basis, four days a week.

• On March 27, 2025, a Bengaluru trial court granted an ad-interim injunction in Darshan’s favour, temporarily halting the release of BOSS, which had been scheduled for April 14, 2025, per The News Minute.
• On May 2, 2025, the same trial court dismissed the stay application and vacated the ex-parte injunction, clearing the path for the film’s release, according to The News Minute.
• Darshan and his wife Vijayalakshmi Darshan subsequently appealed to the Karnataka High Court, challenging the trial court’s order as suffering from “manifest legal infirmities.”

The appeal is listed as MFA No. 4257/2026 (CPC) — Darshan Srinivas & Anr v. Siri Productions & Ors — before Justice Yerur’s bench, as reported by LiveLaw. Respondents include the film’s producer Siri Productions, the CBFC, the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce, and several social media platforms.

On June 25, 2025, Senior Counsel Vivek Subba Reddy, appearing for Siri Productions, gave an oral undertaking before the High Court that the film would not be released until June 30, 2025, according to LiveLaw.

The Hearing — Key Exchanges

Senior Counsel S. Shyam Sundar, with Advocate Pratham N, appeared for Darshan and his wife at the July 7 hearing. Senior Counsel Vivek Subba Reddy appeared for Siri Productions, per LiveLaw.

Darshan’s counsel submitted that BOSS depicts a criminal trial, the recording of evidence, a pronouncement of judgment, and ultimately the protagonist’s acquittal — after which he becomes an MLA. Counsel argued this narrative arc could directly influence witnesses still to be examined in the ongoing murder trial, as reported by Bar & Bench.

Counsel further argued that the accused holds a fundamental right not merely to a fair trial but to receive what was described as a “cool-minded verdict” from the court.

Justice Yerur’s response was pointed. According to Bar & Bench, the judge remarked:

“‘Cool-minded verdict from the court.’ You mean to say the judges are hot-headed? Get influenced by the movie? I don’t know how many of them watch it also.”

Darshan’s counsel also drew the court’s attention to the film’s opening disclaimer — “Based on real events” — and its tagline “Satyameva Jayate,” arguing both reinforce the film’s direct connection to the pending criminal case, as reported by Bar & Bench.

The appellants additionally alleged the film maligns Darshan’s wife by portraying the protagonist’s wife as “Lakshmi” — closely mirroring the name Vijayalakshmi, per Bar & Bench.

On the “manifest legal infirmities” argument, Darshan’s counsel contended the trial court wrongly dismissed the civil suit as based on “wild guessing and imagination,” while ignoring audiovisual material pointing to thirteen parallels between the film and the real-life events in the Renukawamy case, according to The News Minute.

Darshan and 16 others face charges under IPC Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 201 (destruction of evidence), 364 (abduction/kidnapping), 302 (murder), and Section 34 (common intention), as reported by LiveLaw.

Reactions & What’s Next

The producer’s side, through Senior Counsel Vivek Subba Reddy, has maintained that BOSS is a fictional work. The film remains unreleased as of the July 7 hearing, owing to Siri Productions’ earlier voluntary undertaking before the High Court not to release it — an undertaking Justice Yerur declined to formally record as an order, stating: “No need of recording it. I am not passing any order. They have said that they will not (release the film).”

The matter remains sub judice before Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur’s bench at the Karnataka High Court. No final ruling has been issued as of July 7, 2025, and the next date of hearing has not been reported in the sources available to The Courtroom.