Big Twist in Prajwal Revanna rape case: What happened in court today?

Former MP Prajwal Revanna has filed an appeal in the Karnataka High Court challenging his conviction and life sentence in the case involving his former domestic worker. Big Twist in Prajwal Revanna rape case: What happened in court today?

Prajwal Revanna’s lawyers presented several strong arguments to the High Court, focusing primarily on contradictions, procedural lapses, and the influence of media narrative on the trial court’s verdict.

Core Arguments of Prajwal Revanna’s Lawyers:

1. Alleged Weakness of Evidence and Contradictions:

The defence argued that there were significant contradictions and inconsistencies between the victim-survivor’s initial police complaint (FIR) and her later testimony in court.

The lawyers highlighted the considerable delay—reportedly three to four years—in lodging the complaint after the alleged incidents occurred, questioning why the crime was reported only just before the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.

The appeal questioned the credibility and handling of key forensic evidence, such as the clothes and other samples recovered. They argued that the chain of custody was not properly established and raised doubts about items like stains on a mattress, which the prosecution claimed had gone uncleaned for years.

The plea noted that the mobile phone allegedly used to record the videos was never seized by the investigating agency, further weakening the prosecution’s case.

2. Claim of Media Trial and Political Motivation:

The defence contended that the trial court’s verdict was heavily influenced by a pervasive “media narrative” and not strictly based on solid, incriminating material.

It was argued that the timing of the complaint and the release of the videos coincided with the general elections, suggesting the case was politically motivated to harm Prajwal Revanna’s election prospects.

3. Procedural Lapses and Denial of Rights

The lawyers argued that Prajwal Revanna was not given an adequate opportunity to present mitigating factors before the sentencing. They pointed out that the conviction was pronounced on one day and the maximum sentence (life imprisonment) was awarded the very next day, which they claimed denied the accused a meaningful hearing on the quantum of punishment.

The appeal suggested that key investigating officers were not properly examined and criticized certain procedures carried out by medical board witnesses.

In essence, the defence is seeking to have the conviction and life sentence set aside by highlighting what they claim are serious doubts, inconsistencies, and procedural flaws in the prosecution’s case and the trial court’s judgment. The Karnataka High Court is currently hearing the appeal on these grounds.

Also Read: LPG Price down from today: Check new rates in major cities