H D Revanna granted conditional bail in kidnap case

Bengaluru: A Special Court for Elected Representatives on Monday granted JD(S) MLA HD Revanna conditional bail in a kidnap and illegal confinement case. Revanna is currently lodged at the Parappana Agrahara Central Prison complex and is expected to walk out on Tuesday.

The MLA was granted bail on executing a personal bond for Rs 5 lakh with two sureties. He was directed not to threaten and tamper with the prosecution witnesses or the complainant and victim, not to evade the investigation and appear before the Investigating Officer (IO) whenever called for investigation, to furnish his passport to the Court and not leave the State Court without obtaining written permission from the Court, not enter K R Nagara taluk or the permanent residence of the victim directly or indirectly till further orders.

The court also directed Revanna to appear before the IO every second Sunday of the month and mark his attendance between 9 am and 5 pm for six months or till the charge sheet was filed, whichever is earlier and not indulge in a similar offence.

The order was passed by Justice Santhosh Gajanan Bhat on Monday evening.

While Revanna engaged senior counsel C V Nagesh for his bail plea, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Jaina Kothari and Additional Public Prosecutor Ashok Naik argued on behalf of SIT.

Nagesh claimed that there is a political conspiracy behind Revanna’s arrest and the victim has recently said in a video that she has not been abducted by Revanna or his family.

Kothari and Naik countered it by saying that the SIT recorded statements both under CrPC sections 161 (examination of witnesses by police) and 164 (statements recorded by Magistrate) and the victim has given a statement against Revanna.

The SIT advocates also argued that the bail application was moved when the accused was already in custody and hence the matter is not maintainable. However, the Judge differed with this argument and said, “.....you please argue on the merit of the case.”

Nagesh further added that the victim’s son lodged the complaint saying his mother had not come home and he also mentioned that she had gone with the known individual on a motorbike. “How is it interpreted as kidnap? It is not a case of kidnap."

Naik said that the victim and her family have been threatened by the accused and the victim needs police protection. After a brief adjournment, Nagesh argued that the sections invoked by SIT were invalid and cited a few previous court verdicts on kidnapping cases.

Nagesh said: "SIT has not furnished a single piece of evidence against my client to establish that he abducted the victim. There is no demand for money or valuables or any sort of force against the victim. The Section 364A (kidnapping for ransom) cannot be invoked in this case."

He further added that cases against Prajwal Revanna have got nothing to do with Revanna and he requested to grant his client Revanna immediate bail relief. He also targeted the SIT counsels and asked, "Why are two special public prosecutors appearing for bail objection?"

However, Kothari clarified that they aren't repeating the argument and one is adding to the other argument. Later, Kothari requested the court to make further submissions to counter Nagesh's argument.

But, Nagesh objected to this saying, "If SIT gets another round of argument, I should also be allowed to counter it."

Kothari pointed out that there is some misinformation in Nagesh's argument. "Victim is not a relative of Revanna as stated by CV Nagesh and 161 statements before the IO have been recorded on May 5 and not later."

To this, Justice Bhat said, "161 and 164 statements are furnished before the court in both remand applications."

SIT sought time to furnish written documents related to this, but was turned down by the Judge and he reserved the order at 5 pm and granted bail to Revanna.

Revanna was arrested on May 4 by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up to probe the alleged serial sex abuse in Hassan. After being in the SIT custody till May 8, Revanna was remanded in judicial custody till May 14.

The case was registered at the KR Nagara police station in Mysuru on May 2 following a complaint by the 20-year-old son of the elderly victim. The complainant alleged that one Sathish Babanna, who turned out to be Revanna's aide, took his mother away on April 29 at the behest of Revanna.

Babanna was arrested on May 3 and was remanded in judicial custody. On May 4, the woman was rescued from a farmhouse in Kalenahalli in Mysuru’s Hunsur taluk belonging to Revanna’s aide, Rajashekar. The survivor has also accused Revanna’s son Prajwal of repeated rape.

(With PTI inputs)