Prajwal Revanna Bail Plea | “I Find It Strange !! No Progress In Trial”: Ex-MP’s Lawyer To Karnataka HC
Thank you for reading this post, don’t forget to subscribe!
Today, On 24th June, Suspended JD(S) MP Prajwal Revanna sought bail in a rape case before the Karnataka High Court. His lawyer argued, “I find it strange… no progress in trial,” citing 150 witnesses and prolonged delays in proceedings.
Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Monday heard the bail plea of suspended JD(S) MP Prajwal Revanna in the rape case.
The matter was listed before Justice S R Krishna Kumar.
The court initially said, “I’ll take it up at 4.15,” and passed over the matter for later hearing.
Read Also: Denied Bail To Ex MP Prajwal Revanna In Rape Cases: Supreme Court
Senior Advocate S. Navadgi, appearing for Prajwal Revanna, raised concerns about the ongoing trial court proceedings. He questioned whether a case can be partially stayed in this manner, especially when it concerns the same complaint against two accused.
He argued,
“I find it strange, there is one prosecutrix, a hybrid, composite complaint against two persons. Accused 1 (HD Revanna) comes to court (gets stay order)…Only because I did not file Section 482 petition”
Navadgi pointed out that he was not seeking any stay of proceedings but only urging the court to grant bail,
“Am I not entitled to argue, I’m not even seeking stay of proceedings. I am only saying, please enlarge me on bail?”
At this point, the judge asked whether the argument was that if the High Court had already formed a prima facie opinion to stay the trial court proceedings in HD Revanna’s quashing plea, then could the same reasoning be applied to consider bail for Prajwal Revanna as well.
Navadgi stressed that the legal bar for bail was not as high as that for quashing a case. He said,
“Changed circumstances is also is, what happened after my bail application was rejected. Matter (trial) did not move further, I am aggrieved by that. Till this date, the matter stands (without significant progress).”
The judge acknowledged this, saying,
“Trial has not proceeded.”
Navadgi added,
“No progress at all! It is not even trial, there has not been committal yet. And kindly chargesheet. 157 witnesses.”
He also said,
“All that I can say is, I am not responsible.”
Read Also: No Bail for JD (S) MP Prajwal Revanna in Sex Tapes Case
He argued that from the time of rejection of his previous bail plea till now, “there is no progress in the case, number 1. And where do I stand today? The prosecution, with all its ability, has cited over 150 witnesses.”
He continued,
“And then there is defence witnesses that I have to produce, and then there is a huge amount of digital evidence … I do not want to hazard a guess on how long the trial would take.”
Referring to the Supreme Court’s observation in the Manish Sisodia excise case, the court said that delay in trial could be a valid ground for bail.
Supporting this, Navadgi remarked,
“The court keeps adjourning the matter.”
He repeated,
“There is no progress.”
Navadgi also cited multiple Supreme Court judgments to support his argument that prolonged trials justify the grant of bail.
He said,
“Except for saying it is serious offence, they don’t say anything. They also say I can influence witnesses.”
The State counsel objected, saying, “He was absconding initially.”
Navadgi countered, “There was no FIR when I went away.”
The State also argued that the victim was abducted, but Navadgi replied,
“There is no substance (to the argument that I can influence witnesses). Conditions can be imposed to ensure he cannot enter particular jurisdiction.”
Navadgi continued his submissions, pointing out that the chargesheet has already been filed and no remand or further investigation has been sought.
He stated,
“From the time they have filed chargesheet, they have not sought remand. No further investigation is ongoing. They don’t require my presence (in jail),”
He even cited the historic ADM Jabalpur case and said,
“ADM Jabalpur I want to cite. Justice Khanna’s view on Article 21.”
He pointed out, “150 witnesses, it definitely makes the procedure unfair.”
The State counsel responded by saying there are clear directions on how the trial must proceed. He said the trial began on May 2 and is about to conclude “unless he throws tantrums.”
Referring to the large number of witnesses, the court asked,
“How did you manage?”
The State replied,
“We have almost concluded. We do not repeat evidence.”
The State counsel said,
“This man has no legs to stand before this court. His conduct”
But the court interrupted and asked,
“How relevant is conduct for bail… I need some provision.”
The State counsel added,
“This court has not only observed against him but his mother also.”
To this, the judge asked,
“How is it relevant, mother is outside now.”
After detailed arguments from both sides, the hearing concluded.
Prajwal Revanna is the primary accused in four cases filed after the online circulation of over 2,900 clips depicting the sexual assault of numerous women, including on social media platforms.
Case Title: SRI. PRAJWAL REVANNA Vs STATE BY HOLENARASIPURA POLICE STATION.
