'Would Be Menace To Society If Released': SIT Opposes Before Karnataka High Court Prajwal Revanna's Plea To Suspend Sentence In Rape Case

Opposing convicted former MP Prajwal Revanna's plea for suspension of life sentence and grant of bail in a rape case, the Special Investigation Team told the Karnataka High Court on Monday (November 24) that if enlarged on bail he is not only likely to indulge in similar offences but would also be a menace to the society.

Special Public Prosecutor Professor Ravivarma Kumar arguing for the SIT submitted before a division bench of Justice K S Mudgal and Justice Venkatesh Naik T: 

“The manner in which the appellant committed the offence against the victim is also important. The other factor is if at all the appellant is enlarged on bail he is not only likely to indulge in similar offences and he would be a menace to the society. Since the abduction case where the victim in this case is the witness the trial of that case against the parents of the appellant will be seriously jeopardized. The victim being abducted twice earlier is an indication that it could be further aggravated if the appellant is released on bail.”

Kumar also submitted that there are nine main principles governing grant of bail in appeal. He said “First is the possibility of delay in disposal of appeal, it is a major factor. In the instant case, there is an expeditious disposal of the case. Now that appeal is before the court we are ready to address the court on merits.”

Citing the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay where cases against MP's and MLA's are directed to be monitored by the High Court for quick disposal he said “I would strongly recommend the spirit of directions be kept in mind and this appeal be taken up on priority basis.”

He then said:

“What type of accused...what are his criminal antecedents also have to be considered. The political background of the appellant is also required to be considered, he is grandson of former Prime Minister. He was also district in-charge minister for Hassan district. The entire district machinery including IAS officers worked to protect the appellant and his father and never came to the rescue of the victim and her family.”

He further said that Revanna has not cooperated with the investigations and this conduct is also to be taken note of while considering his bail plea.

"He did his best to frustrate the trial. He has not surrendered his phone which was used for recording all the sexual acts he committed against the victim which were recorded by him," Kumar added. 

On the nature/gravity of the offence Kumar said, “In the instant case the allegation is one of rape by the employer against gullible rustic village servant working in the house that to during the lockdown period. It is a heinous offence and repeatedly indulged in is the finding of trial court. So does not warrant for release on bail.”

Kumar also argued that bail is the rule and jail is an exception that principle is available under Section 439 CrPc (regular bail) but not here as Prajwal Revanna had suffered conviction. The loopholes or lacunae pointed out in the evidence cannot be considered at this stage, Kumar added. 

Then he submitted that the sole testimony of the victim in such an offence is sufficient for conviction and corroboration is not needed even though corroboration is available in the present case. “If I am able to show that conviction can be based on victim testimony then other evidence need not be looked into at all,” he said.

To a query posed by the court that the appellant has argued that the primary device allegedly used to record video was not seized Kumar said “It is not our case that we are producing the primary device. But if prosecutrix evidence is accepted then what remains?”

He supported his arguments on this point by referring to various case laws.

As per prosecution, the victim worked as a maid at a farmhouse owned by the Revanna family. It is claimed that from 2021, during the COVID-19 lockdown, Revanna repeatedly raped her and filmed the assaults in different locations. Further, it is alleged that Revanna used the videos to intimidate and silence her, preventing her from complaining.

Additional City Civil and Session Judge Santhosh Gajanan Bhat had on April 3, framed charges against Revanna under Sections 376(2)(k) (rape by a person in a position of dominance), 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 354(A) (sexual harassment), 354(B) (assault or use of force with intent to disrobe), 354(C) (voyeurism), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) and Section 66(e) of the Information Technology Act. He was convicted on August 2. Challenging the same, he moved the High Court in appeal.

The plea will be heard on Tuesday.

Case Title: State By Special Investigation Team AND Prajwal Revanna

Case No: Criminal Appeal No. 1977/2025