Kerala HC denies POCSO accused copies of CCTV visuals citing victim's privacy

The Kerala High Court has refused to provide an accused in a POCSO case with copies of CCTV visuals recovered from the place of the crime’s occurrence, citing concerns over the victim's privacy and the possibility of misuse. However, the court directed the trial judge to allow the accused's lawyer to view the footage in the courtroom and take notes to facilitate the cross-examination of witnesses.Justice Jobin Sebastian passed the order on October 29, 2026, while partly allowing a criminal miscellaneous case filed by Rajan Babu, the sole accused in the case, who is facing trial before the Fast Track Special Court, Kottarakkara.The accused had approached the High Court challenging an order of the trial court declining his request for copies of CCTV footage retrieved from the hard disk recovered from the place of occurrence. He had sought the footage under Rule 19(4) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, contending that access to the recordings was necessary to prepare his defence and effectively cross-examine the witnesses.The accused is facing charges under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.Before the High Court, the accused's counsel submitted that the footage retrieved from cameras installed at his house was essential for formulating an appropriate defence. Without an opportunity to view the visuals, the accused would be unable to effectively cross-examine the victim and other witnesses, the counsel argued.Opposing the plea, the Public Prosecutor submitted that the footage contained visuals of the victim and her mother. Providing copies to the accused could result in their misuse and infringe upon the victim's privacy and dignity, the prosecutor argued.The court observed that an accused's right to receive copies of prosecution records was an essential safeguard to protect the constitutional right to effectively defend oneself. However, it said that the right to a fair trial could not be considered solely from the perspective of the accused."The concept of a fair trial cannot be viewed solely from the perspective of the accused. It must also be considered in conjunction with the rights and interests of the victim, including her right to privacy and dignity, as well as the broader interests of society," the court observed.The court further noted that the possibility of the CCTV footage being misused could not be ruled out if copies were handed over to the accused. It held that withholding copies was appropriate to protect the victim's privacy and anonymity.At the same time, the court acknowledged the accused's concern that denying access to the footage could affect his ability to prepare his defence and cross-examine the witnesses.Finding a way to balance the competing interests, the court directed the trial court to make arrangements for the accused's counsel to view the CCTV footage in the courtroom at 9.30 am on October 31, in the presence of the Public Prosecutor and the court's Chief Ministerial Officer. The counsel would also be permitted to take down necessary notes to facilitate the cross-examination of witnesses.