Bengaluru: Questioning the life imprisonment awarded to former MP Prajwal Revanna in the alleged sex video and rape case, his counsel urged the court on Monday to suspend the trial court’s conviction.
He challenged the credibility of the evidence and pointed to the victim’s silence for several years. He also sought immediate bail for Prajwal Revanna.
The case came up before a Division Bench comprising Justice K. S. Mudagal and Justice T. Venkatesh Nayak.
Senior counsel Sidharth Luthra, appearing for Prajwal, argued that no case had been registered at the time Prajwal left the country. He questioned the prosecution’s claim that Prajwal failed to hand over his personal Apple handset, pointing out that no notice had been issued to him under Section 91 directing him to submit the device.
He added that the prosecution had also not attempted to obtain the phone’s details from the mobile company using the IMEI number.
Luthra further questioned why the victim had remained silent for three years and had not filed a complaint earlier.
“How did four cases suddenly get registered at once against Prajwal?” he asked, alleging that the complaints were motivated by political vendetta.
He also argued that the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) evidence was unreliable.
“If the victim was raped in 2019 and 2021, why did she come forward only in 2023? And if she went to the farmhouse, why did she not take back her clothes?” he submitted, alleging that the police procedure for recovering the clothes was suspicious.
He also noted that the official who conducted the DNA test had died, raising doubts over the admissibility of the FSL report.
The court adjourned the hearing to December 3.
Earlier, Prajwal Revanna said that his continued detention is unwarranted. Prajwal Revanna, through his counsel, also said that the prosecution’s case lacks strength, the evidence does not establish a clear connection, and therefore, his continued detention is unwarranted.
Senior counsel Siddharth Luthra, representing Prajwal Revanna, said that the conviction was announced on August 1, 2025, and the sentence was delivered on August 2.
He also said that Prajwal Prajwal should have been given a fair opportunity to be heard before sentencing, adding that if the court intended to impose the maximum punishment, he should at least have been allowed to present factors that might lessen the severity of the sentence.
“If the main foundation of the prosecution’s case is weak and the evidence does not clearly connect me to the alleged crime, then there is no valid reason to keep Prajwal in jail,” he added.
Prajwal Revanna, who was arrested in May 2024 after returning from Germany, is contesting the court judgment on several grounds, including what he claims are contradictions in the survivor’s testimony and inconsistencies in the evidence produced by the prosecution.
A special court that convicted Revanna had sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of his life and imposed fines, in one of the four sexual abuse and rape cases against him.
(IANS)
