'No Incriminating Evidence, Complete Media Trial': Prajwal Revanna Tells Karnataka High Court Seeking Bail In Rape Case

While seeking suspension of life sentence and grant of bail in a rape case, convicted former Member of Parliament Prajwal Revanna contended that the prosecution's case is shaky and the linkage of evidence is not made out and that he should not be kept in custody.

Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the appellant, submitted that, “My submission is where the substratum of the prosecution case is shaky and linkage of evidence is not made out, I should not be kept in custody.”

“I will say that it is a case where there is no incriminating evidence and it is a complete media trial," he added.

Luthra referred to the evidence of prosecution witnesses and pointed to the discrepancies in the collection of electronic, medical and forensic evidence by the prosecution.

He said, “The first submission is that video from open source is not worth credibility. This is an offence which is reported after 3 to 4 years. Even after the PW 1 (victim) comes into police control there is a delay in recording the complaint. The farmhouse where this (alleged sexual assault) has happened is no more in existence. The ownership of the building is with somebody else.”

He also pointed out that the prosecution failed to produce the call records of the victim's phone, which she possessed to prove her location at the time of the alleged offence.

Further, he questioned the recovery of the clothes of the victim from the farmhouse and said, “On May 9, 2024 she was taken to the farmhouse, the building she says has gone. She did not get her clothes recovered that day. She has produced clothes, which she has for over 4 years. On 20th May, the IO gets a brainwave that I should go to the farmhouse and recover clothes and the victim does not go with him. Thus it is a questionable recovery, they have no answer to that.”

Referring to the impugned order, it was submitted that, “On August 1, conviction was pronounced and on August 2, sentence was given. I had to be given a meaningful hearing. I am saying if you have to give maximum punishment, give me some opportunity to show mitigating circumstances.”

A Division Bench of Justice K.S. Mudagal and Justice Venkatesh Naik T has now posted the matter for hearing on November 24, and directed the appellant to submit a synopsis of his submissions. The prosecution has been directed to file its objections before the next date of hearing.

Additional City Civil and Sessions 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) of the IPC and Section 66(e) of the Information Technology Act.

The judge had convicted him of all charges, and on August 2, he was sentenced to life imprisonment. Challenging the conviction, Revanna has filed an appeal in the High Court. In his appeal, this application seeking suspension of sentence and grant of bail has been filed.

Case Title: State By Special Investigation Team v. Prajwal Revanna

Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 1977/2025