The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday, December 3, rejected an application filed by rape convict and former Member of Parliament Prajwal Revanna seeking suspension of the life sentence imposed on him.
A division bench of Justice KS Mudagal and Justice Venkatesh Naik T held that the gravity of the offence and the potential impact on other pending cases made it inappropriate to grant bail at this stage. “Weighing the material on record, the gravity of the offence and considering the effect on other pending cases against the appellant, if the appellant is released on bail, this is not a fit case for granting suspension of sentence,” the court said.
The bench observed that multiple cases alleging sexual abuse are pending against Prajwal and noted that the survivor in the present case had delayed approaching the police due to the “sound political and economic background” of the accused. It agreed with the Special Public Prosecutor’s submission that releasing Prajwal on bail could lead to witness tampering in the connected cases still under trial.
The court added that Prajwal may, if necessary, seek priority listing for the final hearing of his appeal.
Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for Prajwal, argued that the prosecution’s case was weak, the evidence was not properly linked, and that Prajwal should not be kept in custody. “There is no incriminating evidence, and it is a complete media trial,” he said.
Luthra pointed to alleged inconsistencies in electronic, medical and forensic evidence, including the State’s failure to produce call records of the survivor. He also said the complaint was lodged three to four years after the alleged assault, that the farmhouse where the incident was said to have occurred no longer existed, and that Prajwal was denied adequate time at sentencing to present mitigating circumstances.
He further argued that the case was the result of a political vendetta, with the accusations surfacing years after the alleged incident.
Opposing the plea, Special Public Prosecutor Ravivarma Kumar said that releasing Prajwal on bail would pose “a menace to society” and could endanger witnesses, especially since the survivor in the present case is also a witness in an abduction case pending against Prajwal’s parents.
“The victim being abducted twice earlier is an indication that it could be further aggravated if the appellant is released on bail,” Kumar argued. He added that Prajwal had not cooperated with investigators, including by failing to surrender the phone allegedly used to record sexual acts.
Calling the offence “heinous,” Kumar said the trial court had found repeated sexual assault of a vulnerable domestic worker during the COVID-19 lockdown. He also stressed that after conviction, the legal principle “bail is the rule and jail is an exception available under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (regular bail)” no longer applies.
Rejecting Prajwal’s plea, the bench said the defence was essentially arguing the merits of the case, which cannot be considered while deciding a plea under Section 389 CrPC (suspension of sentence).
“The appellate court cannot pick lacunae here or there at this stage,” the judges said, noting that issues such as political rivalry, delay in complaint, FSL reports, video evidence, and DNA testing must be evaluated during the final appeal.
The court noted that its observations were limited to deciding the suspension-of-sentence application and should not be construed as a final opinion on the appeal.
On December 2, Prajwal approached the Supreme Court seeking that his case be transferred to another judge, alleging bias on the part of the Sessions Court judge who convicted him.
Prajwal had earlier moved both the trial court and the Karnataka High Court with similar requests, but his transfer plea was rejected at both stages. The petition filed before the Supreme Court challenges these orders.
Prajwal was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in August for raping a farm help employed in his family home.
Four cases, including three for rape and one for sexual harassment, were registered against Prajwal in 2024 after hundreds of videos allegedly showing sexual assaults on several women surfaced online.
The sessions court had on April 3 framed charges against Prajwal under IPC Sections 376(2)(k) (rape by a person in a position of dominance), 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 354A (sexual harassment), 354B (assault with intent to disrobe), 354C (voyeurism), 506 (criminal intimidation), 201 (destruction of evidence), and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act. The judge subsequently convicted him on all counts and on August 2 sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Prajwal then challenged the conviction before the High Court, where he also sought suspension of sentence and bail. The appeal is now listed for final hearing on January 12, 2026.
Trials in the remaining cases are yet to conclude.