In a landmark ruling, the Karnataka High Court granted anticipatory bail to Bhavani Revanna in a kidnapping case linked to sexual abuse allegations against her son, Prajwal Revanna. Justice Krishna S Dixit emphasized the significant role women play in family life, advocating for their preferential treatment in bail matters.
Justice Dixit remarked that women, as central figures in family dynamics, face substantial disruptions if detained. He stressed the need for cautious consideration before subjecting them to custodial interrogation, highlighting their emotional ties to family as a factor necessitating special treatment.
“In our social structure, women are the epicenters of family life; their displacement, even for a short period, ordinarily disturbs the dependents. Added, they are emotionally attached to the family. Therefore, investigating agencies should be very cautious while seeking their custodial interrogation. Women by their very nature deserve preferential treatment inter alia in matters relating to bail, regular or anticipatory,” stated the Court.
The State’s criticism of Bhavani Revanna’s alleged failure to prevent her son from committing offences was dismissed by the Court, which questioned the legal duty of a mother to control the actions of her adult children.
The case against Bhavani Revanna involved allegations that she participated in the kidnapping of a woman to prevent her from filing a complaint of sexual assault against Prajwal Revanna. Initially granted interim anticipatory bail with conditions to cooperate with the investigation and avoid certain districts, the Court’s final order today solidified her anticipatory bail, rejecting claims of non-cooperation from the State.
Special Public Prosecutor and Senior Advocate Prof Ravivarma Kumar argued that Revanna misled the investigation, but the Court noted that an accused is not obligated to provide answers that satisfy the police, upholding the principle of presumed innocence and protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) of the Constitution.
Additionally, the Court observed discrepancies in the FIR, which initially named other individuals without implicating Bhavani Revanna. It questioned the application of Section 364A (kidnapping for ransom) of the Indian Penal Code against her, finding insufficient evidence of her involvement in threatening the victim’s life.
Reiterating the principle that “bail is the rule and jail the exception,” the Court firmly rejected any form of oppressive legal practices reminiscent of the “Idi Amin jurisprudence.”
The Court also dismissed the argument that Bhavani Revanna’s political background should influence the decision, affirming her right to bail as a married woman with deep societal roots. It further noted that the police could seek to revoke her bail if she violated any conditions.
Senior Advocate Sandesh Chouta, alongside Nagesh, represented Bhavani Revanna, while Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesh assisted Prof Varma for the State.
With these observations, the Karnataka High Court allowed the anticipatory bail petition for Bhavani Revanna, underscoring the need for a balanced approach in judicial proceedings involving women.
