The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed two petitions by former Janata Dal (Secular) MP Prajwal Revanna to transfer the trial in two pending rape cases against him from the 81st Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru to some other sessions court [Prajwal Revanna v. State of Karnataka].

Justice MI Arun today rejected arguments that the present trial judge is likely to be biased against Revanna since the same judge had earlier convicted the legislator in another rape case.

Revanna's counsel also pointed out that the trial court judge had criticised both Revanna and his lawyer in the judgment.

However, the High Court was not convinced that this would indicate any bias on the part of the trial judge.

"The observations in the judgment may sound a bit harsh but that cannot be construed as a bias on the part of the presiding officer. Admittedly, the petitioner has tried to drag the case and resort to delay tactics which has been frowned upon by the trial court. If that can be a ground for transfer of a criminal case, there would be petitions filed for transfer in almost all criminal cases where the accused feels that he may get convicted. This practice cannot be permitted," the High Court held.

The Court also dismissed arguments that the trial judge had not properly appreciated the evidence before it in the earlier rape case.

"Insofar as it relates to erroneous appreciation of evidence, it is always open for the petitioner to challenge the judgment delivered by the trial court. That also cannot be a ground for seeking transfer," the High Court ruled.

The Court concluded that it cannot order the transfer of the case merely because the trial judge had not ruled in Revanna's favour earlier.

"In the course of arguments, the petitioner has relied upon a decision of the Bombay High Court.. (the observations in this case apply on a case to case basis and is not a ground for) the petitioner to seek transfer from one court to another merely because the court is not siding with him, as in the instant case. For the aforementioned reasons, I do not see any merits  in the instant petition and the same is accordingly dismissed," the Court ordered.

However, it also urged the trial court to decide on the pending rape cases based on their own unique facts and merits.

"However, the trial court is directed not to be prejudiced by the conduct of the petitioner in filing petitions for transfer of the case from the trial court and decide purely on merits of  the case," the High Court said.

Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave appeared for Revanna.

Revanna had moved the High Court with pleas to transfer the trial in two cases that involved allegations under Sections 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 354A (outraging modesty), 354B (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe), 354C (voyeurism), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 201 (hiding evidence) of the Indian Penal Code. These cases also cited a charge under Section 66E (transmitting images in violation of another's privacy) of the Information Technology Act (IT Act).

These are two of four cases that were filed against Revanna last year, after over 2,900 videos depicting the sexual assault of several women were circulated online, including on social media.

In August this year, Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Santhosh Gajanan Bhat convicted Revanna in one of the rape cases filed against him, which involved allegations that he repeatedly raped a maid employed by his family. Revanna was sentenced to life imprisonment in this case and is presently lodged at a Central Jail in Bengaluru.

In his transfer plea, he raised concerns that two of the remaining cases against him are pending before the same judge who convicted him in August, namely the judge presiding over the 81st Additional City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru and assigned criminal cases against legislators.

Revanna contended that this trial court earlier made adverse and unnecessary remarks both against Revanna as well as his counsel.

This, Revanna argued, has raised apprehensions about whether he will get a fair trial in the remaining rape cases.

Revanna's plea was filed through advocate Girish Kumar BM.