Bengaluru, December 3 (NationPress) The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the bail application submitted by former MP Prajwal Revanna, the grandson of ex-Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda, who sought to appeal his life sentence related to the sex CD and rape case. The court noted that providing bail to Prajwal might present a risk of him influencing witnesses.

The ruling was made by a bench led by Justice K.S. Mudagal and Justice T. Venkatesh Naik on Wednesday.

“Upon reviewing all pertinent evidence, the grave nature of the crime, and the implications of releasing the appellant on bail concerning other ongoing cases, the court concluded that this is not a suitable case for bail or sentence suspension,” the bench stated.

“With other related cases still pending, the argument from the Special Public Prosecutor is compelling: should the court suspend the sentence and release the accused, there exists a genuine risk that he may influence or obstruct witnesses in those additional cases,” the bench conveyed.

The court emphasized that Prajwal should not be granted bail at this juncture.

It was noted that the accused faces multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. Referring to an initial case filed at the Holenarasipura Rural police station in Hassan district, the court pointed out that bail had previously been denied during the trial.

Records from the police indicate that the victim hesitated to file a complaint due to fear stemming from Prajwal's reputation.

Earlier, contesting the life sentence given to Prajwal Revanna in the purported sex video and rape case, his legal counsel appealed for the suspension of the lower court's conviction.

The lawyer questioned the validity of the evidence and noted the victim's long silence. He also requested immediate bail for Prajwal Revanna.

Senior counsel Sidharth Luthra, representing Prajwal, argued that no cases were lodged when Prajwal departed the country, challenging the prosecution’s assertion that he failed to surrender his personal Apple phone, stating that no directive under Section 91 had been issued for the device's submission.

He also criticized the prosecution for not attempting to acquire the phone's information from the provider using the IMEI number.

Luthra further raised questions about the victim's three-year silence before filing complaints.

“How did four cases suddenly emerge against Prajwal?” he inquired, suggesting that the complaints are politically motivated.

He contested the reliability of the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) evidence.

“If the victim was assaulted in 2019 and 2021, why did she only come forward in 2023? And if she attended the farmhouse, why did she not recover her clothing?” he argued, suggesting issues with the police protocol for seizing the garments.

Additionally, he noted the passing of the official responsible for the DNA test, casting doubt on the FSL report's admissibility.

Conversely, the prosecution countered the bail plea, warning that if Revanna is freed, he may reoffend and pose a threat to society.

Special Public Prosecutor Professor Ravivarma Kumar argued that the manner in which the appellant committed his crimes is a significant consideration. He stated that releasing the appellant could lead to similar offences and represent a danger to the community.

He highlighted that the victim serves as a crucial witness in an abduction case involving the appellant’s relatives, and releasing him could jeopardize that trial. The fact that the victim had faced abduction on two occasions indicates that risks could escalate if bail is granted.

Prajwal Revanna, arrested in May 2024 upon returning from Germany, contested the court’s verdict on various grounds, including alleged contradictions in the survivor's account and inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence.

A special court that convicted Revanna sentenced him to life imprisonment and imposed fines in one of four sexual abuse and rape cases against him.