In a landmark ruling delivered on August 1, 2025, a special court in Bengaluru sentenced former Member of Parliament Prajwal Revanna to life imprisonment for the rape of a 47-year-old domestic worker, underscoring the judiciary’s firm stand against abuse of power by public figures. The court also imposed a fine of ₹11.5 lakh, directing that ₹11.25 lakh be paid as compensation to the survivor.

Background: A House Help’s Fight for Justice

The survivor, a woman who worked at the Revanna family’s farmhouse in Holenarasipura, filed a complaint in April 2024, accusing Prajwal Revanna of raping her on two occasions in 2021—once at the farmhouse and once at his Bengaluru residence. She alleged that Revanna used threats and intimidation to keep her silent, exploiting her economic vulnerability and the social power dynamics between them.

The case quickly gained national attention when videos of sexual assaults—allegedly recorded by Revanna—surfaced and were widely distributed via pen drives across Karnataka’s Hassan district. The distribution, believed to be politically motivated, drew outrage and prompted the state government to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the allegations.

Evidence and Trial

Investigators gathered a large cache of digital evidence, including more than 200 video files allegedly depicting sexual abuse. The SIT’s investigation included forensic testing of clothing belonging to the survivor, which contained traces of the accused’s DNA. Medical experts also matched visible features from the videos to Revanna using medical photography.

In September 2024, the SIT filed a 1,632-page chargesheet naming Revanna as the primary accused. It included statements from over 100 witnesses, digital forensic analysis, and corroborating evidence, including WhatsApp chats, location data, and testimonies of other alleged victims who had come forward.

Revanna was charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including:

• Section 376(2)(k) – rape by a person in a position of control
• Section 376(2)(n) – repeated rape
• Section 354A/B/C – sexual harassment and assault
• Section 506 – criminal intimidation
• Section 201 – destruction of evidence
• Section 66E of the IT Act – violating a woman’s privacy by capturing and sharing obscene content

Court’s Verdict

The court pronounced Revanna guilty on August 1. In its sentencing remarks, the judge emphasized the abuse of status and power by the accused. “The victim’s social and economic position made her particularly vulnerable. The accused took advantage of this, breaching the trust of someone employed in his own home,” the judgment stated.

The court further noted that such cases reflect a systemic misuse of dominance, and that the punishment must serve as both retribution and deterrence. In addition to life imprisonment, the ₹11.5 lakh fine was levied, with the majority designated for victim compensation.

Emotional Scene in Court

Prajwal Revanna, a 35-year-old political heir and grandson of former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda, broke down in court after hearing the verdict. According to reports, he pleaded for leniency, stating that his rapid rise in politics had made him a target. The court, however, rejected these arguments, affirming that social standing cannot shield one from justice.

Revanna’s legal team has indicated plans to file an appeal in the High Court, although legal experts believe the voluminous evidence may make overturning the conviction difficult.

Political Fallout and Public Response

The verdict has triggered a political storm in Karnataka, with opposition leaders criticizing the BJP-JD(S) alliance for remaining silent during the investigation period. Several women’s rights groups hailed the ruling as a victory for working-class women, often subjected to invisible abuse in domestic and political spaces.

Karnataka Deputy CM D.K. Shivakumar issued a sharp statement: “This is a warning to all those who think they can get away with crimes because of their last names or positions. Justice has been delivered.”

Human rights advocates have pointed to the speed of the trial as a model for how sexual assault cases should be handled—emphasizing sensitivity, survivor protection, and scientific investigation. Over 23 witnesses were examined during the trial, and the court maintained full confidentiality around the survivor’s identity throughout.

Other Cases Pending

This conviction pertains to just one of four known cases against Prajwal Revanna. The other three involve similar allegations by different women, most of whom worked in subordinate positions in his homes or campaign offices. Those cases are still under investigation and may result in separate trials.

Legal observers note that this first conviction could strengthen the credibility of the remaining cases and potentially lead to more witnesses stepping forward.

A Fall from Grace

Once seen as a rising star in Karnataka politics, Prajwal Revanna’s downfall has been dramatic. The only JD(S) candidate to win a Lok Sabha seat in 2019, he was seen as a potential future leader in the party, which has traditionally been dominated by the Gowda family.

His arrest in May 2024, after a brief stint abroad, led to his expulsion from party duties, though the JD(S) has stopped short of a full disavowal. The party has remained largely quiet since the court’s ruling.

Political analysts argue that the Revanna verdict marks a turning point—not only for legal accountability but for the role of dynasties in Indian politics. “It sends a message that no amount of political legacy can protect someone from the consequences of criminal acts,” said constitutional expert Prof. Rajani Keshavan.

Conclusion

The sentencing of Prajwal Revanna is more than just a criminal conviction—it represents a broader reckoning with how power, privilege, and impunity intersect in Indian public life. For the survivor and others like her, the court’s ruling signals a sliver of justice in a system often stacked against the powerless.

As civil society applauds the judgment and legal circles examine its precedent-setting nature, the case stands as a reminder: No one is above the law—not even those born into power.