'Case must rest on evidence alone': Supreme Court rejects Prajwal Revanna’s plea to shift trial

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Special Court to decide the pending trial against former JD-S MP Prajwal Revanna in the sexual assault case only on the basis of evidence presented before it.

The court, however, declined to consider his plea to transfer the pending trial from the Special Court (MP/MLA) to any other sessions court in Bengaluru on the ground of reasonable apprehension of bias.

Senior advocates Sidharth Luthra, and Siddharth Dave and advocate Balaji Srinivasan on behalf of Revanna, raised the grounds of apprehension of bias against the trial judge in view of certain observations.

On this, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, presiding over a bench with Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, "There are hypothetical situations in court. We make observations. But I am not someone who will take the browbeating of judges or courts lightly… As soon as the judge makes an observation there are allegations made against him."

The bench, however, said judges and courts also make mistakes but they are being rectified. "Sometimes, errors happen as we deal with such a large volume of cases and evidence," the CJI said.

In a relief to Revanna, the court clarified that the presiding officer would not be swayed by the fact that he found the petitioner guilty in an earlier case.

"Obviously, he shall evaluate the evidence in the pending trials and will confine his conclusions on the basis of the evidence led in the pending trials only,'' the bench said, after hearing

The counsel for the petitioner sought transfer of the trial in view of certain observations made by the presiding officer in his judgment on August 01, 2025 convicting the petitioner under Section 376(2)(k), 376(2)(n), 354-A, 354-B, 354-C, 506 and 201 of the IPC and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

"It seems to us that these observations are contextual with reference to the record of the particular trial and keeping the observations made by the High Court in a previous judgment. Be that as it may, these observations by the presiding officer cannot be the foundation of forming a definite opinion of bias or prejudging the issues,'' the bench said.

The court made it further clear that no inference would be drawn against the petitioner on the basis of the previous conviction or the evidence led in the trial which led to his conviction, more so, when the appeal by the petitioner was said to be pending before the High Court.

"All the contentions, like the expunging of remarks by the presiding officer, can be raised by the petitioner before the High Court in the pending appeal. We request the High Court to consider all such submissions in the light of the facts and circumstances and the material on record,'' the bench said.

The court disposed of the special leave petition filed against the Karnataka High Court's judgment of September 24, 2025.

The petitioner claimed the High Court's order was against the settled principles governing transfer of criminal cases and violative of his fundamental right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

His plea stated the disparaging remarks by the special judge against the counsel, reliance on unproved report from another case and pre-judgment of issues created an ongoing and reasonable apprehension of bias, which cannot be cured in appeal but only prevented through transfer.

The petitioner has been facing trial in two other cases of sexual assault pending before the Special Court. Those cases were lodged after hundreds of videos were circulated during the last Lok Sabha polls. The petitioner claimed those videos were morphed.