/newsfirstprime/media/agency_attachments/2025/07/28/2025-07-28t111554609z-2025-07-23t100810984z-newsfirst_prime_640-siddesh-kumar-h-p-1-2025-07-23-15-38-10-2025-07-28-16-45-54.webp)
Follow Us
/newsfirstprime/media/media_files/2025/12/01/prajwal-revanna-crying-2025-08-01-14-05-21-1-2025-12-01-16-23-53.webp)
Former MP Prajwal Revanna’s challenge to his life sentence in an assault case came up before the Karnataka High Court, where his legal team sought suspension of the lower court verdict and requested bail.
The Karnataka High Court on Monday heard the appeal filed by former MP Prajwal Revanna, who is challenging the life imprisonment awarded to him by the trial court in a sexual assault case. The petition sought suspension of the sentence and requested that he be granted bail until the appeal is decided.
Also Read:Big relief soon! Karnataka plans utility access for 4.5 lakh homes without OC/CC
Appearing for Revanna, senior Supreme Court advocate Siddharth Luthra presented a detailed argument questioning the foundation of the case. According to submissions, Revanna had travelled abroad in April 2024 at a time when no criminal case had been registered against him. His legal team argued that multiple cases were filed suddenly and simultaneously, raising questions about the timing and intent behind the complaints.
The defence highlighted that the prosecution had accused Revanna of withholding his Apple mobile phone, but no notice under Section 91 had been issued to demand the device. The lawyers argued that investigators had not attempted to obtain information using the IMEI number from the phone manufacturer. They also questioned why the survivor did not file any complaint for nearly three years despite alleging incidents in 2019 and 2021.
Also Read:Bengaluru shivers as winter illnesses surge; KC General Hospital sees sharp rise in patients
Further, the defence argued that the seizure of the survivor’s clothes and the circumstances in which police reportedly obtained them were unclear. Another point raised was that the expert who conducted the DNA examination had passed away, casting doubt, according to the defence, on the reliability and admissibility of the FSL evidence.
The submissions also claimed that the cases were politically motivated and that the survivor had been influenced by the state machinery. The court heard both sides at length and decided to continue the proceedings on Wednesday.
