Karnataka High Court reserves verdict in anticipatory bail plea by Prajwal Revanna in rape case

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday reserved its verdict in an anticipatory bail filed by suspended Janata Dal (Secular) leader Prajwal Revanna in connection with a criminal case involving allegations that he repeatedly raped a maid employed by his family at their estate.

Justice M Nagaprasanna reserved the verdict after hearing submissions by Senior Advocate Prabhuling K Navadgi for Revanna and Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Prof Ravivarma Kumar for the State.

The sexual abuse allegations against Revanna emerged after over 2,900 videos depicting the sexual assault of several women were circulated online including on social media.

Among other allegations, Revanna is accused of having repeatedly sexually assaulted a domestic servant, who was allegedly later kidnapped and kept in confinement to prevent her from filing a complaint.

Four cases have been filed in the matter against Prajwal Revanna on various charges by a Special Investigation Team (SIT).

Criminal cases have also been filed against his parents who were accused of carrying out the rape survivor's abduction. His father and JD(S) leader HD Revanna is also facing sexual assault charges.

Both of Prajwal Revanna's parents are presently out on bail, while Prajwal Revanna remains in judicial custody.

During his anticipatory bail hearing today, the Court briefly commented that the allegations narrated against Prajwal Revanna were "too gory."

SPP Kumar urged the Court not to allow Revanna's anticipatory bail given the gravity of the allegations, since he was a flight risk and given the financial and political influence that the Revanna family held.

Revanna's family's influence was used to silence victims, he said.

"If there is something that can fit into a nymphomaniac's description, it (this case) outsmarts that also. The more aggravating fact is, the lady (victim) was not only under his (Revanna's) control, but she was double the age of the perpetrator, if not more. Such a lady, she held his feet, she... I don’t want to (get into details)," SPP Kumar added.

Senior Advocate Navadgi contended that there are several factual allegations that should be considered by the trial court, and that such aspects have to be dealt with delicately.

He assured the Court that Revanna would abide by any bail condition imposed.

He also submitted that while the complainant claimed that she was raped prior to the lockdown, she continued to reside with the Revanna family even after the alleged incident.

"She (victim) said this happened prior to lockdown. But she continued to stay there.

The Court, however, expressed reservations over this submission.

"Did she have any choice?" the Court asked.

"These are questions (for trial)... I was very responsible when I made the submission that I don't want to travel beyond to say whether 376 (rape) occurred or not. But merely by making those statements in the complaint at that stage - it should not be taken that case for 376 is made out," Navadgi replied.

The Court proceeded to reserve orders in the matter.

Justice Nagaprasanna also indicated that he would pronounce orders on other anticipatory bail pleas and a regular bail plea filed by Revanna around the same time.

The judge clarified that while he intends to pronounce these verdicts together, it would not be a common order and would be independent judgments on each plea.

[Read Live Coverage]