Karnataka HC refuses to defer rape trial against Prajwal Revanna
Bengaluru, May 02 (PTI): The Karnataka High Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking to delay the rape trial against suspended JD(S) leader Prajwal Revanna.
The petition had been filed by his mother, Bhavani Revanna, requesting time for her son to appoint new legal representation.
Justice Vishwajith Shetty declined to intervene, stating that issuing such a directive to the trial court would undermine its authority.
"If orders are passed asking the trial court to adjourn it, it will demoralise ," he remarked during the hearing. He made it clear that the plea would not be entertained, adding, "I will pass orders, I will not entertain."
On April 3, the Bengaluru trial court framed serious charges against him, including rape, voyeurism, criminal intimidation, and illegal dissemination of private videos.
Bhavani Revanna's plea highlighted that Prajwal's previous counsel, advocate Arun G, had stepped down on April 23, shortly after the court denied a request to transfer the case.
Following this, the trial court offered Prajwal the option of appointing a lawyer through the District Legal Services Authority , to which he replied that his family was arranging for private counsel.
However, when no lawyer was engaged within the short period given, the court appointed Chief Legal Defence Counsel Jayashree RS as amicus curiae on April 29. The trial was then scheduled for daily hearings starting May 2.
The petition argued that the appointment was made without Prajwal's consent and with insufficient time for preparation, given the complex nature of the case and the large volume of evidence. It also pointed out that the appointed amicus was given just two days to review the case material.
In addition to seeking deferment, Bhavani alleged irregularities in the trial court's recording of submissions. She claimed that her son's former lawyer had met him in jail and informed him that courtroom arguments were not accurately reflected in the court's orders.
Requests for certified copies of the proceedings were allegedly ignored or dismissed, and Bhavani said the trial judge mocked her instead of addressing her concerns.
She requested the High Court to direct the trial court to release certified copies of the proceedings, but this plea too was not entertained.
Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol represented Bhavani Revanna, while Special Public Prosecutor Ravivarma Kumar appeared for the Special Investigation Team . The petition was filed by advocate Mayur D Bhanu of Legal Care Inc.
Four separate cases have been registered against Prajwal, who is facing charges of rape and sexual harassment, and a Special Investigation Team was formed to probe cases against him.
The cases came to light after pen-drives containing explicit videos allegedly involving Prajwal were reportedly circulated in Hassan, ahead of Lok Sabha polls there on April 26, 2024.
He was arrested by the SIT on May 31 last year, upon arrival at Bengaluru Airport from Germany in connection with a case registered at the Holenarasipura Town Police Station.
Prajwal had failed in his bid to retain the Hassan parliamentary constituency in the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. JD(S) suspended him from the party following the cases filed against him.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
High courts upheld only 8 per cent of death sentences; SC confirms none in recent years: Report
New Delhi (PTI): Highlighting that a high acquittal rate of death row convicts by the Supreme Court and high courts demonstrates a pattern of "erroneous or unjustified convictions", a study of 10 years of death penalty data has revealed that the top court did not confirm any death sentences in recent years.
The study by Square Circle Clinic, a criminal laws advocacy group with the NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad, found that an overwhelming majority of death sentences imposed by trial courts did not withstand scrutiny at higher judicial levels. Acquittals far outnumbered confirmations at both the high courts and Supreme Court levels.
According to the report, the trial courts across India awarded 1,310 death sentences in 822 cases between 2016 and 2025. High courts considered 842 of these sentences in confirmation proceedings but upheld only 70 or 8.31 per cent.
In contrast, 258 death sentences (30.64 per cent) resulted in acquittals. The study noted that the acquittal rate at the high court level was nearly four times the confirmation rate.
Data showed that of the 70 death sentences confirmed by high courts, the Supreme Court decided 38 and did not uphold a single one. The apex court has confirmed no death sentences between 2023 and 2025.
"Wrongful or erroneous or unjustified convictions, then, are not random or freak accidents in the Indian criminal justice system. The data indicates they are a persistent and serious systemic concern," the report said.
Over the last decade, high courts adjudicated 1,085 death sentences in 647 cases, confirming only 106 (9.77 per cent). During this period, 326 persons in 191 cases, were acquitted.
The report attributed low confirmation rates to the appellate judiciary’s concerns regarding failures in due process. "This coincides with increased Supreme Court scrutiny of safeguards at the sentencing stage," the report said.
Of the 153 death sentences decided by the apex court over the last decade, the accused were acquitted in 38 cases. In 2025 alone, high courts overturned death sentences into acquittals in 22 out of 85 cases (over 25 per cent). The same year, Supreme Court acquitted accused persons in more than half of the death penalty cases it decided (10 out of 19), the report said.
The study highlighted that 364 persons who were ultimately acquitted "should not even have been convicted and unjustifiably suffered the trauma of death row". It added that such failures extend beyond adjudication and reflect serious lapses in investigation and prosecution.
The question of remedies for wrongful convictions remains pending before the Supreme Court. In September 2025, three persons acquitted by the apex court filed writ petitions seeking compensation from the state and argued that their wrongful convictions violated their fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
"In 2022, the Supreme Court crystallised a sentencing process in Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh , and mandated all courts to follow those guidelines before imposing or confirming a death sentence," the report read.
In 2025, the apex court held in Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. Union of India that death penalty sentencing hearings form part of the right to a fair trial and stressed that capital punishment can be imposed only after a constitutionally compliant sentencing process.
"However, even at the high courts whether the process mandated under Manoj is being complied with is in doubt,” the report said.
