A star, an assault and an eight-year question: Kerala court set to decide

KOchi, For nearly viii years, a francis scott key oppugn has hung o'er the glittering domain of Malayalam cinema: Could one of its own biggest stars, the actor Dileep, have orchestrated a horrific attack on a fellow actress?On Monday, a court in Kerala is expected to answer that question, delivering a verdict in a 2017 assault case that changed from a terrible crime into a sensational legal saga- a trial of extraordinary twists, agonising delays, and a battle over narrative that has far outlasted years beyond its original deadline.The actress-victim, who has worked in Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam films, was abducted and allegedly molested in her car for two hours on the night of February 17, 2017, by some persons who forced their way into the vehicle and later escaped in a busy area of Kochi.Ernakulam District and Principal Sessions Judge Honey M Varghese will deliver the verdict after completing the trial proceedings, which began in January 2020.As many as 10 accused who faced trial are Sunil NS alias Pulsar Suni, Martin Antony, Manikandan B, Vijesh VP, Salim H, Pradeep, Charly Thomas, actor Dileep , Sanil Kumar alias Mesthri Sanil and Sharath.They were charged under sections 120A , 120B , 109 , 366 , 354 , 354B , 357 , 376D , 201 , 212 and 34 of IPC.Section 66E of the Information Technology Act and 67A. Dileep faces an additional charge under Section 204 of the IPC .Police arrested the accused soon after the incident and filed the first chargesheet against seven persons in April 2017. During further investigation, Dileep was arrested on July 10, 2017, after the probe team found that the prime accused Suni had allegedly sent a letter to him from jail. Dileep was granted bail on October 3, 2017.In November 2017, police filed a supplementary chargesheet against seven more persons, including Dileep. Five of them were later discharged or turned approvers.Although the mobile phone used to record the sexual assault visuals could not be traced, police relied on the memory card containing the videos, which was submitted in court by a lawyer.The prosecution claims that the complainant informed Dileep’s first wife, Manju Warrier, of his affairs with another actress. There was a fight between the complainant and Dileep over this during the rehearsal of a stage event in 2016.The conspiracy was hatched in the aftermath of the fight at a hotel in Kochi later. Like the case itself, the trial too witnessed several twists and turns. In 2019, Dileep approached the Kerala High Court seeking a CBI probe, but the plea was dismissed. In 2019, the Supreme Court directed that the trial be completed in a six-month period.However, frequent petitions before higher courts by the accused, the prosecution and the complainant delayed proceedings, and the trial finally began only in January 2020. The Covid-19 pandemic halted proceedings for several months.Later, Special Prosecutor A Suresan resigned, and the prosecution approached higher courts seeking transfer of the trial to another court in December 2020.On December 29, 2021, when the investigation officer was to be examined as the last witness, the prosecution informed the court that new information had emerged and sought further investigation, halting the trial again.The further probe was based on revelations by film director B Balachandra Kumar that Dileep possessed visuals of the victim. Another allegation was that Dileep conspired to harm the investigation officers, leading to another case against him and five others.When the trial resumed, V N Anilkumar was appointed Special Public Prosecutor. He resigned in December 2021 and was replaced by V Ajakumar. Another major twist emerged in 2022 when police moved the trial court seeking an inquiry into illegal access to the memory card kept in court custody.Though the petition was dismissed, the Kerala High Court later ordered a fact-finding inquiry after the complainant alleged tampering. It was revealed that the memory card had been accessed by a magistrate and later by officials at the District Sessions Court.This led the High Court to issue detailed guidelines on handling sexually explicit evidence in December 2023. A total of 261 witnesses were examined during the trial, including several from the film industry. Many actor-witnesses turned hostile. The investigation officer alone was examined for 109 days. The court admitted 834 documents and two defence witnesses.Meanwhile, two key witnesses - former MLA PT Thomas and director Balachandra Kumar- died during the trial stage."We are hopeful of the judgment, as all possible evidence was presented before the court. The delay was due to various developments during the trial," an officer who was part of the investigation told PTI.This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.