New Delhi, Dec 11 (NationPress) The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to consider a request from former JD-S MP Prajwal Revanna, who is the grandson of former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda. This request aimed to shift the rape trial from a Special MP/MLA Court in Bengaluru to a different sessions court.

A panel comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi dismissed Revanna’s argument that the trial judge exhibited prejudice against him.

The CJI remarked that a previous conviction by the same court in another rape case could not be a valid basis to claim bias, stating: "We have no reason to doubt that the officer would not be swayed by the fact that the petitioner was found guilty in the earlier case and will confine his conclusions on the basis of evidence led in the pending trial."

Senior advocates Siddharth Luthra and Siddharth Dave, representing Revanna, contended that statements made by the trial judge towards the counsel in the past case indicated bias.

Nonetheless, the apex court affirmed that such remarks "cannot constitute grounds for bias" and allowed Revanna to petition the Karnataka High Court solely for the removal of those remarks.

Revanna sought intervention from the Supreme Court after the Karnataka High Court dismissed two writ petitions that sought to transfer trials concerning charges of rape, sexual harassment, voyeurism, criminal intimidation, and violations under the IT Act from the Special MP/MLA Court to another sessions court in Bengaluru.

In a ruling on September 24, a single-judge Bench of Justice M.I. Arun determined that the Special MP/MLA Court was specifically set up to handle offences involving current and former legislators, and transfer requests could not be made simply because the accused perceived the proceedings as severe.

Justice Arun noted that Revanna had already faced conviction in another case, and the trial court's insistence on continuous proceedings did not prove bias.

"The comments in the judgment may appear somewhat stern, but that does not equate to bias on the part of the Presiding Officer. It is evident that the petitioner has attempted to deliberately prolong the case and employ delay tactics, which the trial court has disapproved of. If such a reason could warrant a transfer, petitions for transfer would be filed in nearly every criminal case where the accused believes they may be convicted," the Karnataka High Court stated.

Revanna, who is currently serving a life sentence for another rape case adjudicated by the same court, faces multiple charges stemming from allegations of ongoing sexual assault and intimidation.