Women Deserve Preferential Treatment In Bail Matters: Karnataka HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Prajwal Revanna's Mother

Bhavani Revanna was accused of involvement in kidnapping a woman to prevent her from reporting alleged sexual assaults committed by Prajwal Revanna. Initially granted interim anticipatory bail with conditions to cooperate with the investigation and avoid specific districts.

A Bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit said, “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.”

Senior Advocate CV Nagesh appeared for the Petitioner and Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesh appeared for the Respondent.

Regarding the allegations against Bhavani Revanna, the Court was critical of the State's argument that she had failed to prevent her son's alleged criminal actions. The Court remarked, “But, what duty a mother owes in law to prevent her major children from committing offences, has not been shown by turning the pages of statute book or by citing rulings. History & epics bear testimony to the fact that children of noble parents may commit delinquencies.”

The Court dismissed allegations of non-cooperation, rejecting claims that she had misled investigators during questioning. The Court added, “The police cannot insist that an accused should give answers in the way as the police desire. After all in our evolved Criminal Jurisprudence, an accused is presumed to be innocent and that she has a constitutional guarantee against compulsive self incrimination vide Article 20(3)”

It noted discrepancies in the FIR, originally targeting others without implicating Bhavani Revanna until later stages.

Counsel for the petitioner successfully argued that the allegations under Section 364A of the IPC (kidnapping for ransom) were unsubstantiated against her. The Court echoed that serious offenses alone do not automatically bar bail, emphasizing that "bail is the rule and jail the exception."

Addressing Bhavani Revanna's political background, the Court cautioned against using it as a sole criterion to deny bail, highlighting her settled family life and societal roots. The Court added, “However, all that cannot be a sole consideration for denying bail in a matter like this, especially when petitioner is a married woman having a settled family and roots in the society.”

It affirmed the possibility of bail cancellation should she violate conditions or misuse privileges.

Cause Title: Bhavani Revanna v. State Of Karnataka

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Sandesh Chouta and Senior Advocate CV Nagesh

Respondent: Special Public Prosecutor BN Jagadeesh assisted by Prof Ravivarma Kumar