Supreme Court Refuses To Transfer Ex-MP Prajwal Revanna's Rape Cases To Another Court, Says Trial Judge's Observations Are Innocuous
The bench expressed confidence that the Presiding Officer would evaluate the evidence in the pending trial impartially, without being swayed by the previous conviction.
The Supreme Court, today, refused to transfer the trial of Janata Dal (Secular) leader and former MP Prajwal Revanna regarding two separate rape cases from the jurisdiction of the Special MP/MLA Court in Bengaluru.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi ordered, "The Special Leave Petition is directed against an order...passed by the High Court of Karnataka, declining the transfer of trials pending before Ld. Presiding Judge, 81st Additional City Civil and Sessions Court, Bengaluru (MP/MLA Cases). The prayer was to transfer the cases to any Court in Bengaluru. The ground on which the transfer was sought is based on certain observations made by the Learned Presiding Officer in its judgment dated 01.08.2025, convicting the petitioner under Section 376, 354(A), 354(B), 354(C), 506, and 201IPC and Section 66E of the IT Act. We approve those averments and observations made by the Ld. Presiding Officer. It seems to us that these observations are made innocuously...these observations by the Presiding Officer cannot be the foundation of forming a definite opinion of bias. We have no reason or doubt in our mind that the Ld. Officer cannot be swayed by the fact that he found the Petitioner guilty in an earlier case, and obviously, he shall evaluate the evidence in the pending trial. In other words, no inference shall be drawn against the petitioner on the basis of the previous conviction or the evidence that has led to his conviction...All contentions like remarks by the Presiding Officer, can be erased by the Petitioner before the High Court in the pending appeal...We request the High Court to consider all the submissions in the light of the factual circumstances and material on."
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra and Senior Advocate Siddarth Dave appeared for Revanna.
CJI remarked, "Mr. Luthra we don't want to send a message that today I went to the Supreme Court and I got this order, and now you see...We have to keep the morale of our District Judiciary high."
The bench said, "We will help you in rebuilding your confidence in the system...we have full trust and faith in the officers."
The plea for transfer was anchored on the claim of bias by the Presiding Officer, specifically referencing observations made in a judgment dated August 1, 2025, that resulted in the petitioner's conviction under various sections of the IPC and the IT Act. The Supreme Court, however, approved the trial judge's observations, characterising them as "innocuously" made, and concluded that they were insufficient to establish a definite opinion of bias.
Background
Revanna filed two distinct petitions before the High Court, requesting the transfer of his ongoing criminal trials from the Special MP/MLA Court to an alternate judicial forum, citing allegations of bias on the part of the presiding officer.
Recently, the High Court also refused to suspend the life sentence imposed on Revanna by a Trial Court in one of the four rape cases registered against him.
The Supreme Court, in November 2024, also denied bail to him for the allegations that emerged in April, with multiple women accusing Revanna of coercion into sexual acts that were allegedly recorded.
Cause Title: PRAJWAL REVANNA Vs STATE OF KARNATAKA [SLP(Crl) No.18850/2025]