Bengaluru, Jan 16 (Reporter) In a sharp observation, Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court on Thursday emphasised that the law must be upheld uniformly, regardless of an individual’s status, while addressing the issue of digital evidence in the case against suspended JDS leader Prajwal Revanna. "The images here, even of the victim, are obscene. Just because you are Prajwal Revanna, the law can't be bent for you," Justice Nagaprasanna stated, reinforcing the court's commitment to the impartial application of the law. Prajwal, who faces multiple charges of sexual assault, is permitted to examine only the digital evidence relevant to the victim involved in the case currently before the trial court. His request for access to evidence related to other victims from separate cases was denied by the court. Accused in at least four cases of rape, sexual assault, and criminal intimidation, Prajwal had petitioned the court for copies of images and videos collected by the State Special Investigation Team (SIT). While acknowledging Prajwal's entitlement to access evidence in his own case, the court ruled that material revealing the identities of other victims should not be disclosed. Justice Nagaprasanna remarked, "We can’t allow invasion of their privacy," highlighting the importance of safeguarding the victims’ confidentiality. Revanna, the son of former minister HD Revanna and grandson of former Prime Minister HD Deve Gowda, is facing legal action in multiple cases related to sexual abuse and harassment. In August 2024, the SIT filed a chargesheet detailing allegations against him, including the recovery of images and videos from a Samsung phone purportedly belonging to his driver. These materials allegedly include information about other victims, raising concerns over potential privacy breaches if shared. The court clarified that Revanna would be allowed to review statements, photographs, and digital evidence related to the current case, in line with Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as per the P Gopalakrishnan vs State of Kerala precedent. Additional Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) BN Jagadeesha argued that Prajwal's request was merely a tactic to delay the trial, as the prosecution had already provided the relevant digital evidence in the four cases. The court directed the State to withhold any evidence that might compromise the privacy of victims, ensuring adherence to the law. Prajwal continues to face multiple legal challenges, with four separate cases registered against him. Investigations are ongoing under the supervision of the SIT...////...