New Delhi, Jul 13 The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to examine a plea filed by the Karnataka government challenging a high court order quashing the charge of outraging a woman's modesty under Section 354 of the IPC against JD(S) leader and MLA H D Revanna, filed by his former domestic help.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran also issued a notice to H D Revanna and asked his counsel to file a counter affidavit to the state government’s petition.
During the hearing, the bench questioned the Karnataka government as to why it did not challenge the order when the high court dropped the charges under Section 354 of the IPC, and asked it to have some discipline.
The bench noted that a domestic help has levelled different sets of allegations against the father-son duo of H D Revanna and Prajwal Revanna.
H D Revanna is the son of ex-prime minister H D Deve Gowda, and father of jailed former MP Prajwal Revanna. Union minister H D Kumaraswamy is his younger brother.
Sexual harassment allegation against H D Revanna surfaced after multiple rape and sexual abuse cases were registered against his son and former Hassan MP, Prajawal Revanna.
One of the complainants in the Prajwal Revanna case levelled sexual harassment charges against H D Revanna.
Prajwal Revanna has already been convicted in one of the four cases registered against him.
The cases against Prajwal Revanna came to light after pen-drives containing explicit videos allegedly involving him were reportedly circulated in Hassan, ahead of the Lok Sabha polls there on April 26, 2024.
On November 19, last year, the high court quashed the charge of outraging a woman's modesty (Section 354 of IPC) against H D Revanna but upheld the sexual harassment charge under Section 354A of IPC and directed a trial court to examine whether the delay in filing the complaint can be condoned under Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The high court had observed that the complaint’s contents aligned with the offence of sexual harassment under Section 354A, rather than the more serious charge under Section 354.
Revanna had moved the high court seeking to quash the FIR, arguing that the complaint was filed beyond the three-year limitation period applicable to offences punishable with imprisonment of up to three years.
The prosecution countered that the petition itself had become infructuous since police had already submitted a chargesheet and the trial court had taken cognisance.
The high court also noted discrepancies between the complainant’s original version and the police report, particularly regarding the allegations against H D Revanna’s son, who is listed as the primary accused.
For H D Revanna, the high court had said that the charges must be framed strictly based on the complainant’s initial account, which supports only a Section 354A charge.
Since the offence under Section 354A carries a maximum punishment of three years, the judge held that the complaint is prima facie barred by limitation under Section 468 of CrPC.
The matter has therefore been remanded to the trial court.
Following the high court order, on December 29 last year, the trial court discharged H D Revanna in a sexual harassment case registered in 2024.
The additional chief judicial magistrate discharged H D Revanna from the case registered in the Holenaraseepur town police station in Hassan district.
