Bengaluru special court discharges H.D. Revanna from sexual harassment case citing unexplained delay of over four years in lodging complaint
In a major relief for JD(S) leader and former minister H.D. Revanna, a special court in Bengaluru has discharged him from the allegation of sexually
In a major relief for JD(S) leader and former minister H.D. Revanna, a special court in Bengaluru has discharged him from the allegation of sexually harassing a 47-year-old former maid when she was working at his house in Hassan during 2020. The Special Court of Magistrate for criminal cases against former and present MPs and MLAs said that both the complainant and the prosecution had failed to provide reasonable explanation for the court to take cognisance of the alleged offence under Section 354A (sexual harassment) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by condoning the delay, under Section 473 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), of over four-year in lodging the complaint. SC seeks H.D. Revanna’s response on Karnataka’s plea against High Court order quashing the charge of outraging modesty K.N. Shivakumar, judge of the special court, in his December 29 verdict, declined to accept the claim of the prosecution that the complainant woman took over four years to lodge the complaint due to fear of political power of Mr. Revanna. “No fear...” The Court pointed out that she had stated in her complaint that after she had left her job at Mr. Revanna’s residence, a house granted to her under a housing scheme of the State Government was demolished, and that had she had lodged a complaint with the Hassan Deputy Commissioner and the district police against Mr. Revanna on demolition of her house.
“When she had no fear of Mr. Revanna in approaching the Deputy Commissioner and the district police against him when her house was allegedly demolished at the instance of him, how come she had such a fear to lodge complaint or to take legal action or to disclose about incident of alleged sexual harassment,” the Court questioned. The Court pointed out that the woman failed to provide specific dates or year for when the incidents happened. It also noted that even if she couldn’t report because she was employed at his house between 2020-22, she waited for two years, for reasons best known to her, after leaving the job to file the complaint in April 2024. Even the Special Investigation Team (SIT) neither recorded or explained reason for the delay in launching prosecution, the Court said. Indicating that the complaint might have forgotten the alleged incidents involving Mr. Revanna as memories fade from the minds of victims due to the lapse of time if the offences are not severe in nature, the Court said that the subsequent incident of alleged rape by his son, Prajwal Revanna, might have prompted her to add older incidents involving Mr. Revanna while lodging the complaint against the son.
The BriefWire