ORAL ORDER

1. Registry is directed to replace the name of the petitioner with XYZ.

2. The instant revision has been filed by the revisionist with the following prayers :

“[A] Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order and/or direction, by quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajula below application Ex.36 dated 18.09.2023.

[B] Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, operation and implementation of the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajula below application Ex.36 dated

18.09.2023.”

3. The brief facts leading to filing of this revision are as under. 3.1 It is the case of the revisionist that when she was minor, the accused No.1 Suresh alias Suro Balabhai Vala and accused No.2 Gopalbhai Bhupatbhai Baldhiya committed rape on her and they recorded the video of committing rape on the revisionist. They threatened the revisionist that if she would tell anybody about the incident, they would kill her brother and make the video viral in entire village. Thereafter, after one and half month, when the revisionist was going to her agricultural field, accused Nos.3 Prakashbhai Sankhat and accused No.5 Dilip alias Dipak Rameshbhai Shiyal also committed rape on the revisionist and they also recorded the video of committing rape on the revisionist and threatened her not to tell anyone about the incident. Thereafter, accused Nos.1 to 5 committed rape on her frequently at different time. Hence, ultimately the revisionist filed complaint before the concerned police station and the police arrested all the accused. After completion of investigation, the case has been registered as POCSO Case No.2 of 2023 before the learned Trial Court. Thereafter, the accused filed application below Exh.36 before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajula for obtaining DVD recovered by investigating officer and the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 18.09.2023 directed the investigating officer to provide five copies of DVD to the accused. Hence, the present revision.

4. Though the private respondents are served, none remain present. What appears is that application below Exh.36 was moved before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajula by the accused to provide documents and all papers which are forming part of the charge-sheet. Learned Sessions Judge ordered to provide DVD which is forming part of the sexual act disclosing identity of the victim and the offence along with other documents, if any. This order is under challenge.

5. Having heard learned advocate for the revisionist, what appears that the impugned order is cryptic. Though under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C. it is right of the accused to get all the documents upon which the prosecution relies, but it is not absolute right to get DVD which is electric evidence forming alleged sexual act. To get such DVD is not qualified right of the accused. The issue of privacy of the victim – complainant is paramount and at the highest pedestal then the right of the accused to get the document under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. which is relied upon by the prosecution. The issue has been succinctly addressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in P. Gopalkrishnan alias Dileep vs. State of Kerala and another – (2020) 9 SCC

16. The relevant paragraph to decide the issue reads as under :-

“50. In conclusion, we hold that the contents of the memory card/pen drive being electronic record must be regarded as a document. If the prosecution is relying on the same, ordinarily, the accused must be given a cloned copy thereof to enable him/her to present an effective defence during the trial. However, in cases involving issues such as of privacy of the complainant/witness or his/her identity, the Court may be justified in providing only inspection thereof to the accused and his/her lawyer or expert for presenting effe