The High Court, however, allowed investigators to probe him for sexual harassment charges concerning the domestic help the family had employed. The high court had heard Revanna’s prayer seeking quashing of the FIR. During the plea, the police filed a chargesheet, and the trial court took cognisance under Sections 354 and 354A IPC.
Also Read: Governor suspends public service commission chief, seeks SC probe into his daughters’ appointments
The JD(S) leader approached the High Court and argued that cognisance could not be taken because the complaint was lodged after a three-year delay, the limitation prescribed under Section 468 CrPC for offences punishable with imprisonment of three years and below. The trial court later discharged him under Section 354A as well, citing the delay.
At the Supreme Court, a bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran ordered the notice to the JDS leader and verbally questioned how the high court could suggest modifying the charges from Sections 354(outraging a woman’s modesty) to 354A of the IPC.
Also Read: Parties in Gyanvapi, Krishna Janmabhoomi, Sambhal mosque disputes reject SC’s mediation push
The SIT, in May 2024, had arrested Revanna, who represents Holenarasipur in the assembly, on the charge that he, along with others, abducted a rape victim from her KR Nagar home in Mysuru district. The SIT was also probing him on charges of sexual harassment of a domestic help.
