Karnataka High Court heard Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra argue that the rape conviction of suspended JD(S) leader Prajwal Revanna lacked strong evidence and had been improperly influenced by an intense media trial, undermining fairness seriously.
Karnataka High Court heard arguments from Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra on November 13, who contended that the conviction of suspended JD(S) leader Prajwal Revanna in a rape case lacks strong evidence and was influenced by a media trial.
A Division Bench consisting of Justices KS Mudagal and Venkatesh Naik was hearing Revanna’s appeal against a trial court’s decision that sentenced him to life imprisonment for allegedly raping a domestic worker.
Representing Revanna, Luthra claimed,
“It’s a case bereft of any incriminating evidence, or chain of custody linkage and it is a complete media trial. Unfortunately just see the first para of the impugned judgment , the (trial) court’s greatest focus after reiterating the averments and looking at the evidence is that the lady weeps every time a question is asked. I understand, and it is unfortunate. But that cannot be the basis for assuming the truth.”
Luthra highlighted inconsistencies in witness testimonies, a lack of substantial incriminating evidence, and delays in reporting the complaint.
He noted,
“This is an offence that is reported after 3-4 years. Even after she (the rape survivor) comes to the police control (room), there is at least a 24-48 hours delay in recording the complaint,”
He also stated that there were significant lapses in securing the evidence collected during the investigation, raising concerns about potential tampering.
He asserted,
“This is a classic case where after (take) all the samples, clothes, they had to be kept in sealed cover in the locker of the police station… what you call the malkhana in north India. Nothing (like that is done)! The malkhana officer is not even examined. The chain of custody is not done. This man, and this is the catch, it’s a very bizarre case where prosecution witnesses 16, 17, 18, 19 are so-called medical board who actually tried to measure him when he is aroused and data compared,”
Luthra further argued that Revanna was not given adequate time to present a case for a reduced sentence following his conviction on August 1.
He stated,
“(Against each criminal charge), the (trial court) Judge has given me the maximum imprisonment without giving me a meaningful hearing. On August 1, the Hon’ble Judge gives this judgment and on August 2, he gives the sentence. I had to have a meaningful hearing (under law) … If you have to give the maximum (punishment), give me some more opportunity. I will show you the mitigating circumstances,”
As the hearing concluded, Luthra requested the Court to consider granting Revanna interim bail during the pending appeal, emphasizing that he has already spent a year in custody.
He mentioned that with the very foundation of the prosecution’s case appearing weak and evidence improperly linked, continued imprisonment is not warranted.
The Court is scheduled to hear the case again on November 25.
Earlier in April, the trial court had outlined various criminal charges against Revanna under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including:
- Section 376(2)(k) (rape by a person in a position of dominance);
- Section 376(2)(n) (repeated rape);
- Section 354A (outraging modesty);
- Section 354B (assault or use of criminal force to disrobe);
- Section 354C (voyeurism);
- Section 506 (criminal intimidation); and
- Section 201 (causing the disappearance of evidence).
Additionally, Revanna faced charges under Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2008, which penalizes violations of personal privacy, such as sharing private images without consent.
He is the primary suspect in four cases stemming from the circulation of over 2,900 videos showing the sexual assault of multiple women on various online platforms.
The first case was initiated in April of last year by a domestic worker previously employed at the Revanna family’s farmhouse. She alleged that Prajwal Revanna raped her repeatedly and threatened to release footage of the assaults if she spoke out, with the first incident reportedly occurring in 2021.
A trial court in Bengaluru has charged Revanna with several offenses, including rape, voyeurism, criminal intimidation, and the unauthorized distribution of private images.
The court, On July 18, reserved its judgment.
Following public opposition, Revanna fled to Germany after the 2024 Lok Sabha elections but was arrested upon returning to India on May 31, 2024, and has been in custody since. The Special Investigation Team (SIT) that investigated the case submitted its chargesheet in August 2024.
Suspended JD(S) leader and former MP Prajwal Revanna is facing multiple rape and sexual assault cases, following the leak of over 2,900 objectionable videos involving several women. After fleeing the country in April 2024, he returned and is currently in custody.
Case Title: Prajwal Revanna v. State Special Investigation Team