Bengaluru:
Prime accused in the Karnataka obscene video scandal — former MP Prajwal Revanna who is the grandson of ex-Prime Minister HD Deve Gowda, was allowed by a special court on Saturday to view alleged videos of sexual assaults involving the victim in a closed court session.
The Special Court for MLAs/MPs granted permission for Prajwal Revanna, his counsel, a technical team, and the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) to review the confidential videos retrieved from the personal cellphone of the former MP’s driver, who had worked closely with him.
Mr Revanna was brought to the court from the Central Prison in Parappana Agrahara following the order of the High Court in this regard.
Mr Revanna’s counsel, submitted a request to the court to restrict the media from publishing news about the case. However, the court declined, stating it could not issue such an order.
The counsel further requested an adjournment for the confidential viewing of the data, citing the absence of technical experts. The court expressed displeasure, noting that such requests appeared to be delay tactics.
“I have no objection if the counsel files an application requesting a female judge,” the court added.
Subsequently, Mr Revanna and the others viewed the confidential private data, which included the alleged sex videos retrieved from the driver’s personal cellphone, in the closed court hall. The driver had worked for Mr Revanna .
Mr Revanna earlier had filed a petition with the High Court seeking the production of documents and electronic evidence collected by investigators from his driver’s personal mobile phone.
“Everything here is obscene, and there is a limit to obscenity. The court cannot provide data about other women. You are trying to turn back the clock,” stated the High Court bench.
The Karnataka High Court looking into the sex video scandal said on Thursday that the law cannot be bent just because the matter pertains to Prajwal Revanna.
The bench headed by Justice M Nagaprasanna made the statement while hearing the petition by Prajwal seeking to quash the legal proceedings against him. Mr Revanna specifically requested access to all data from the mobile phone. However, the court clarified that only data relevant to the specific case could be inspected, and access to data involving other women would not be permitted.
“No breach of privacy of other women should be done. Forget about others. The victims’ images are here, they are obscene to the core. Just because it is Prajwal Revanna, the law cannot be changed,” the bench had remarked orally.
The counsel for Prajwal Revanna submitted that the phone was thoroughly examined by the investigators.
“Every investigating officer has examined the material. The electronic evidence and records should be treated as evidence. The prosecution objected to the demand for the entire data.”
However, the bench stated that if the petitioner wants data concerning other women, it can’t be provided.
“In cases pertaining to the privacy of the victim, the court can only arrange for inspection. Any means of inspection could be provided, but it can’t be provided to you in the form of a pen drive,” the court said.
The court further observed that barring the case in which a petition has been filed, Mr Revanna cannot ask for data on other women.
The petitioner’s counsel maintained that it will cause serious prejudice to him and he should be allowed to inspect the device.
The court further stated orally that copies will be provided protecting the identity of the women and disposed of Mr Revanna’s petition in this regard.
The prosecution has charged Prajwal Revanna under Sections 354 (A) (sexual harassment), 354 (B) (assault or use of criminal force on a woman with an intent to disrobe her), 354 (C) (act of watching or capturing a woman’s image while she is engaging in a private act), 376 (2) (N) (aggravated form of rape committed by police officers and other public servants in charge, repeatedly raping same woman), 376 (2) (K) (being in position of control or dominance over a woman, committing rape), 506 (criminal intimidation), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC and Section 66 (E) of the IT Act.
The Special Investigation Team (SIT) investigating the sexual assault video case involving Prajwal Revanna submitted the 1,691-page charge sheet to the Special Court for MLAs/MPs.
The charge sheet had mentioned that the victim was raped at gunpoint. The video was made of the rape incident and the victim was repeatedly sexually assaulted, threatened her with making her videos public.
It is also mentioned that the victim had not dared to lodge a complaint out of fear.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
