[Actor Assault case] Victim harassed in open court, 20 lawyers were present despite in-camera proceedings: Prosecution tells Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court today heard transfer petitions moved by the victim and the prosecution in the case concerning the abduction and sexual assault of an actress in which actor Dileep is also accused. (X v. State of Kerala, State of Kerala v. Sunil N.S. @ Pulsar Suni).Both the matters were heard today by a Single Judge Bench of Justice VG Arun..The Prosecutor began by speaking about instances of the victim being harassed in open court and also told the Court that the service of copies of certain forensic reports to the prosecution was dispensed with..Public Prosecutor Suman Chakravarthy said,"In the entire country milord, we'll never hear of such a proceeding where the petition filed by the accused (against a) copy (being) dispensed to the prosecution. An order was passed to the effect and (the copy was) then sent to the CFSL!"."Was that not in pursuance of the Supreme Court Order?", the Court asked..To this, the Prosecutor replied that the Supreme Court had directed the material sought to be distributed to all concerned..Breaking: Malayalam actor Dileep not to get copy of memory card containing video of alleged sexual assault of actress, may inspect contents: SC.Echoing the Prosecutor's words, the Senior Advocate S Sreekumar argued for the victim that around 20 lawyers were present during one instance in the courtroom, despite entry being restricted, all of whom were noting her demeanor and making her repeat statements again and again (the trial was in camera)."Nothing was done to stop this," the Senior Counsel stated..The Prosecution and the Senior Counsel agreed to file a detailed affidavit which stated verbatim all that transpired in the Court during the trial..Justice Arun asked the Prosecution why the charges of harassment had not been brought to the attention of the Trial Court earlier. The Counsel responded that they had made oral submissions as and when instances of irregularity took place. They had desisted from filing a transfer application in order to complete the trial at the earliest..No action had been taken by the Trial Court when the instances were pointed out, they emphasized. This is an unusual case where even the prosecution alleges bias on the part of a trial proceeding!, the Counsel declared..Justice Arun also asked the Senior Counsel for the victim whether an affidavit had been filed by the victim accompanying her petition for transfer, as mandated by Section 407(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Power of the High Court to transfer cases)..The Senior Advocate responded saying that she wished to conceal her identity. The Court informed him that victims in cases like this regularly presented their versions/affidavits in sealed covers, upon which he assured the Court that this would be done at the earliest..The matter is expected to be taken up on Monday, November 2..The actor and his associates are being tried for hatching a conspiracy to take revenge on a female actor in the Malayalam film industry by having her abducted, sexually assaulted, and photographed..Six persons were arrested and arrayed as accused. It was alleged that the victim had a role to play in Dileep’s separation from his wife..The victim, as well as the prosecution team, has moved the Kerala High Court for a transfer of the case from the present trial court. The trial is ongoing before an Additional Sessions Judge, Ernakulam. .On October 16, the prosecution in the case led by Special Public Prosecutor A Suresan voiced protest over derogatory remarks made by the Additional Sessions Court Judge against the Special Public Prosecutor during the hearings..In addition, they had raised concerns about bias and the lack of fairness in the trial, citing repeated adjournments, harassment of the victim."The trial of the victim (the examination) was done in a highly stressed situation and the prosecution is duty-bound to protect the interests of the victim too", the Prosecution's prayer read..Their petition praying for a halt in the trial and leave to approach the High Court was rejected by the Additional Sessions Court on October 23. The Judge ordered the resumption of trial by November 3.