Former JD(S) MP Prajwal Revanna seeks bail in the obscene video case, citing trial delays and changed circumstances. Facing rape and blackmail charges, his plea comes amid legal controversies and alleged stalling tactics. The Karnataka High Court had earlier dismissed related petitions by his mother, Bhavani Revanna.
Former Janata Dal (Secular) MP Prajwal Revanna has once again moved the Karnataka High Court, seeking bail in the high-profile obscene video case involving multiple serious allegations, including rape, sexual assault, blackmail, and criminal intimidation. On Tuesday, his counsel argued that the circumstances surrounding his custody have changed significantly since the earlier denial of bail and that undue delays in the trial proceedings warrant reconsideration.
Appearing before the High Court, senior advocate Prabhuling Navadgi, representing Revanna, stated that the prolonged delay in the trial has become a critical ground for seeking bail. He highlighted that the case is moving at a slow pace, despite the seriousness of the charges, and insisted that justice would be served better if the trial proceeded without Revanna’s prolonged pre-trial detention.
Prabhuling also pointed out that the complainant had filed the case four years after the alleged incidents occurred and made specific allegations of sexual violation only during the recording of her statement. He suggested that the delay in reporting, coupled with inconsistencies in the timeline, merits further judicial consideration in favour of his client.
However, the prosecution strongly opposed the bail application. Special Public Prosecutor Ravivarma Kumar maintained that the trial delays were in no way due to the prosecution’s fault. On the contrary, the accused himself, they argue, has consistently summoned multiple defence witnesses, thus contributing to the delay. The prosecution also stated that such tactics are being used by the accused to slow down the trial process deliberately.
In a related development, the Karnataka High Court had earlier, on May 2, dismissed a petition filed by Bhavani Revanna, Prajwal’s mother, seeking to stay the examination of witnesses in the same case. Her petition argued that Prajwal’s legal team needed time to review over 2,000 documents and appoint a new lawyer, citing unavailability of suitable legal counsel.
The High Court, however, rejected this plea, deeming it an attempt to undermine the authority of the trial court. The court noted that granting such relief would amount to interfering with the trial process, especially after the Special Court had already directed that witness statements be recorded starting May 2.
The prosecution has accused Bhavani Revanna, who is herself an accused in the case, of attempting to mislead the court and delay proceedings further. The Special Public Prosecutor even sought permission to initiate contempt of court proceedings against her for abusing judicial process and obstructing justice.
Earlier, in another twist, the defence lawyer representing Prajwal submitted a memo to withdraw from the case at the Special Court for MLAs and MPs. Following this, Prajwal filed an application seeking additional time to appoint new legal representation. The prosecution again objected, calling it a strategy aimed at stalling witness examination.
Despite the objections, the Special Court ordered that the trial — particularly the recording of witness statements — must commence as scheduled. This prompted Bhavani Revanna to approach the High Court again, seeking a stay and demanding certified copies of the proceedings. Both requests were summarily rejected by the court.
In its observations, the High Court reiterated that it would not entertain petitions that seek to interfere with the ongoing trial or delay the administration of justice. The court firmly stated that the authority of the Special Court must be respected and that no further adjournments or procedural challenges would be permitted on weak or speculative grounds.
| Also Read: Amit Shah: Fight against emergency preserved Indian democracy |
The case stems from explosive allegations involving unauthorized circulation of private videos, voyeurism, and sexual exploitation. On April 3, the Special Court officially framed charges against Prajwal Revanna under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Information Technology Act, including charges of rape, voyeurism, blackmail, and more.
As the legal battle continues, all eyes remain on the Karnataka High Court’s decision regarding Prajwal Revanna’s fresh bail plea, which could significantly impact the trajectory of this politically sensitive and high-stakes case.
