Karnataka High Court Refuses To Cancel HD Revanna's Bail In Abduction Case

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed the petition filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) seeking cancellation of bail granted to Janata Dal (Secular) leader HD Revanna, accused of abducting a woman.

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna had reserved the order on August 01 after hearing the parties. Revanna was granted bail by the special court on May 13.

The High Court today also granted bail to Satish Babanna and others who are co-accused in the case. Copy of detailed judgment is awaited.

The SIT submitted that obscene videos allegedly involving Prajwal Revanna with the woman prompted her (victim's) son to lodge a complaint. It is alleged even before the complaint was lodged, the woman was abducted and an attempt was made to silence her and to destroy the evidence to ensure she does not lodge a complaint against the JD(S) leader's son.

"These facts have been established by evidence gathered and a chargesheet has also been filed. Bail in such a nature of case should be cancelled,” Senior Advocate Professor Ravivarma Kumar appearing for the SIT had argued.

He had said the statement of the victim was recorded and Revanna was specifically indicted in those and without referring to the statement under sec 161 and 164, the court has granted bail.

“Basic ingredients of section 364-A IPC is that the conduct of the accused gives rise to an apprehension that the life of the victim is in danger, the court has not noticed it,” Kumar submitted.

Senior Advocate C V Nagesh appearing for Revanna had opposed the plea contending that the considerations for grant of bail and for cancellation of bail are completely different.

He had said “Other than the statement made by Satish Babana (co-accused) to the son of the victim that the respondent (HD Revanna) had asked the lady to be brought to his house, nothing is there. Would it amount to a penal offence?"

He had also pointed out that in the instant case kidnapping is not made out as the victim is not minor. "For abduction there has to be deceit under Section 362 IPC. Here there is no happening of such an event, the lady was a maid servant and thus there is no deceit. In this case demand and threat is not established,” Nagesh had argued.

Appearance: Senior Advocate Professor Ravivarma Kumar for Petitioner.

Senior Advocate C V Nagesh for Respondent. Case Title: State of Karnataka AND Revanna HD

Case No: CRL.P 4914/2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 385

Click Here To Read/Download Order