“The alleged words spoken, if spoken, or gestures made, if made, against the complainant-woman certainly outrages her modesty, and above all, it can have no nexus to the functioning of the House…No nexus, no privilege, petition dismissed,” the Court said while announcing the verdict.
Karnataka: The Karnataka High Court on Friday refused to cancel the criminal case filed in 2024 against BJP MLC CT Ravi. He was accused of making an obscene remark against Women and Child Development Minister Laxmi Hebbalkar inside the Legislative Council.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, who gave the judgment, made it very clear that immunity granted to legislators under the Constitution does not apply to Ravi in this case.
He said such protection is available only when a legislator’s words or actions are connected to the business of the House. In Ravi’s case, the judge found no such connection.
“The alleged words spoken, if spoken, or gestures made, if made, against the complainant-woman certainly outrages her modesty and above all, it can have no nexus to the functioning of the House…No nexus, no privilege, petition dismissed,” the Court said while announcing the verdict.
The incident reportedly occurred on December 19, 2024, after the Council was adjourned due to protests over Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s comments about Dr BR Ambedkar. During the disruption, Ravi allegedly used obscene words towards Minister Hebbalkar, who had objected to his loud sloganeering.
The complaint was filed by Hebbalkar’s personal assistant, and Ravi was arrested soon after. However, the High Court questioned the urgency of this arrest and granted him interim bail the very next day.
Ravi’s lawyers—Senior Advocates Prabhuling Navadgi and CV Nagesh—argued that he was protected under Article 194(2) of the Constitution, which gives immunity to legislators for anything said or done in the House.
Ravi argues that the FIR should be dismissed because, as an MLA, he is entitled to “blanket immunity” under Article 194(2) of the Indian Constitution, which protects lawmakers’ actions within the legislative assembly.
Senior Advocate Prabhuling Navadgi, representing Ravi, told the court that the police or any external agency cannot investigate the matter, as the alleged comments were made inside the legislature.
He explained, “The primary contention raised here is that the criminal case comes in conflict with the privilege and specific bar under Article 194(2). Sub-clause 2 (of Article 194) gives complete immunity to a member of the house. The registration of case against me is based on something said by me in the legislature. The Chairman of Council already took cognisance and has given a ruling.”
The Karnataka State government, however, opposed this claim, arguing that the immunity granted under Article 194 is not absolute. The State pointed to past judgments by the Supreme Court which have clarified that such immunity is not unlimited.
ALSO READ: Karnataka High Court Rules | Consensual Relationships Do Not Justify Assault
In response, Justice M Nagaprasanna, who was hearing the case, noted that the Court would need to explore whether Ravi’s remarks were connected to his role as a lawmaker, saying, “The Court will have to examine the issue in detail to examine whether the remarks by Ravi on the floor of the house had any a ‘nexus’ with his duties as a lawmaker.”
The Court further discussed whether the immunity under Article 194 could be considered absolute, especially in cases involving criminal offenses. Justice Nagaprasanna emphasized that the court would assess whether the alleged comment falls within the scope of legislative immunity or if there was a reason to allow the case to proceed.
The State Government also opposed Ravi’s plea. It told the Court that the immunity granted under Article 194 is not absolute, and the Supreme Court has also said so in earlier cases.
Justice Nagaprasanna said earlier that his judgment would depend on whether Ravi’s actions were related to his official duties as a lawmaker. On Friday, the judge firmly ruled that Ravi’s alleged remarks and gestures had no link to any legislative business.
“No nexus, no privilege, petition dismissed,” the Court concluded.
In January 2025, the High Court had temporarily stopped any coercive action against Ravi, including arrest, while hearing his plea to dismiss the case. Now, with the Court dismissing the plea, the criminal proceedings will continue.
On December 19, Ravi was arrested by the Belgavi police, but the Karnataka High Court intervened, questioning the necessity of the arrest. The court granted Ravi interim bail the day after his arrest, stating that it needed further examination before proceeding with the case.
