[Kerala Actress assault] Survivor moves Kerala High Court alleging foul play in probe into Dileep

The Kerala actress who was sexually assaulted allegedly at the behest of cine actor Dileep, has moved the Kerala High Court alleging foul play in the investigation of the sensational case..The plea will be heard tomorrow. While the matter was listed before Justice Kauser Edappagath today, the judge recused himself and ordered that the case be listed before a different bench on Wednesday. .In her plea, filed through advocate TB Mini, the survivor has alleged that the Government of Kerala, which had initially supported her cause and even taken credit for the fair investigation, has now backtracked from its constitutional and legal commitment of conducting a free fair and complete investigation."The petitioner bonafide apprehends that the eighth accused, Sri.Gopalakrishan P alias Dileep, who is highly influential, directly and through his related sources has unlawfully influenced some of the politicians in the ruling front and is attempting to interfere with the investigation in this case and prematurely close the same," the plea said. Even though the prosecution had approached the High Court with a petition to extend the time limit fixed by it to complete the investigation into the case, the survivor contended that the prosecution as well as the investigating agency are now threatened by the political higher-ups to end the investigation and file the additional final report in a half-baked manner.She further submitted that against all ethical and legal norms, the advocates representing Dileep interfered with the administration of justice by tampering with evidence and illegally influencing material witnesses. The plea stated that evidence in this regard has already been published in the media, possibly alluding to the leaked tapes of a conversation between Dileep's lawyers and some of the other accused in the case.It is contended that the fundamental right of the petitioner to a fair trial and her right to privacy guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution have been violated. The plea submitted that the visuals of the assault suffered by the petitioner was leaked even though the same was stored in a memory card that was with the court which is conducting the trial in the case. The survivor further alleged that even though the Forensic Science Lab submitted a report confirming the illegal leak, the presiding officer of the trial court has not taken any action or permitted the court staff to be interviewed by the investigating officer. "The illegal access tampering transmission of the contents of the memory card while it is in the custard custody of the court also attracts offenses punishable under Section 201, 204 of the Indian Penal Code and also section 67A of the Information Technology Act 2000 which are cognizable offenses to be investigated by the police," the plea said. The survivor has, therefore, sought the interference of the High Court to ensure a fair and impartial investigation and trial..A brief history of the caseSix persons were arrested and arrayed as accused after the female actor was driven around in a car and sexually assaulted, allegedly at Dileep’s behest.It was alleged that the victim had a role to play in Dileep’s separation from his now ex-wife.In July 2017, Dileep was arrested and charged under various offences under the IPC, including Sections 366 (kidnapping), 120B (criminal conspiracy) , and 376D (gangrape).His first two attempts at getting bail were rejected by the Kerala High Court until October 2017 when the Court finally granted him bail after he had remained in custody for 83 days.Dileep had dispensed with the services of Senior Advocate K Ramakumar after the first failed attempt, and hired Senior Advocate B Raman Pillai to represent him.In November 2019, the Supreme Court partly allowed a plea filed by the actor seeking access to a memory card which contains video footage of the assault. While he was not permitted to receive a copy of the memory card, he was granted permission to inspect the contents of the same – subject to some caveats – in order to present an effective defence.Nearly a year later, citing several instances of the case being delayed on various pretexts, and certain allegations and imputations being made against the Prosecutor and the Special Prosecutor specifically, the prosecution prayed for leave to move the High Court for a transfer of the case.However, in November 2020, the Kerala High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the prosecution and the survivor to transfer the trial from the Additional Sessions Court presently hearing the matter to another Judge.Prior to that, the Additional Special Sessions Court had rejected the plea to transfer the trial.The prosecution in the case, led by Special Public Prosecutor A Suresan, had voiced its protest over some allegedly derogatory remarks made by the Additional Sessions Court Judge hearing the assault matter. Suresan resigned in December 2020.In December 2021, Suresan's replacement Special Public Prosecutor Anil Kumar also handed in his resignation.After the survivor wrote to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan seeking a fair trial, the Kerala Government approached the Supreme Court seeking a 6 month extension on the time limit stipulated by the top court for completion of trial. The deadline is set to expire on February 16 this year.In January, the survivor took to social media with her first public statement on her journey as a survivor and the many trials and tribulations she had to face since the woeful incident took place.The State prosecution then approached the Supreme Court seeking an extension of time to complete the trial in the assault case. The top court ha disposed of the same stating that it was up to the trial court to take an appropriate decision in that regard.In the meantime, the Kerala High Court allowed the prosecution to summon 5 additional witnesses.Dileep has also approached the Kerala High Court with a separate plea seeking to restrain the media from reporting on the trial of the sexual assault case till the final verdict is pronounced.On March 8, the Kerala High Court declined to quash further investigation into the sexual assault case and dismissed Dileep's plea in that regard.The trial was nearing completion when a film director, Balachandra Kumar, gave an interview to media and released some audio clips indicating close association between Dileep, who is the 8th accused in the case, and Pulsar Suni, the 1st accused.The clips and Kumar's statements allegedly revealed a conspiracy to kill the police officers who were involved in the investigation of the actress assault case.This led to registration of a fresh FIR against Dileep and five others.On February 7, the Kerala High Court granted the accused, including Dileep, anticipatory bail in the matter. However, it refused to quash the FIR.