Eight years ago, in February 2017, news broke of the gang rape of a prominent Malayalam film actress..For months, the news focused only on the courage exhibited by the survivor actress who reported the crime immediately and spoke out openly. This was unexpected at the time, especially for an actress from the Malayalam film industry, a space rumoured to be rife with misogyny and hushed up assaults. However, by mid-2017, the focus shifted to startling developments which would later go on to break and remake the industry. A prominent and powerful actor, Dileep, who until then had publicly expressed solidarity with the survivor, was arrested after being charged with conspiring and orchestrating the brutal rape. After nearly 9 long years, the judgment in the trial against Dileep and the other accused is set to be delivered on Monday, December 8, by the Ernakulam District and Sessions Court. The case and trial was anything but simple. This article attempts to summarise important moments from the last 8 years, the charges against the key accused, the witnesses who turned hostile, tangential investigations, and the many court proceedings that have led to this moment. .The assault and arrest of accused.On February 17, 2017 the female actor was on her way to a film shoot location in Thrissur when she was abducted and sexually assaulted by a group of men, in a moving vehicle. The men also recorded videos of the assault. The very next day, the driver of the vehicle, Martin Antony, was arrested and within a week, Sunil NS aka Pulsar Suni, a history sheeter, was arrested. Suni was named as first accused. By the end of the month, four others were arrested and arrayed as accused. Suni remained behind bars for over 7 years until the Supreme Court granted him bail last year. .The Dileep angleA letter written by Suni and smuggled out of his jail cell was Dileep's undoing. In the letter, Suni asked the actor to essentially pay up for completing the "job" he was allegedly hired to do. In July 2017, Dileep was arrested.The alleged motive? Dileep was angry because a few years earlier, the survivor had purportedly informed his then wife, actress Manju Warrier, about his affair with another actress Kavya Madhavan, to whom he is presently married. The gang rape was allegedly his way of taking revenge against the survivor for unsettling his marriage. Dileep's first two attempts at getting bail were rejected by the Kerala High Court until October 2017 when the Court finally granted him bail. Dileep spent a total of 83 days behind bars. The prosecution attempted to cancel his bail citing attempts to intimidate and tamper with witnesses and evidence. However, these attempts were futile with dismissals from both the trial court and the Kerala High Court. The investigation was conducted by the State Crime Branch and the investigating officer DySP Baiju K Paulose.In 2018, Dileep moved the High Court seeking to transfer the investigation in the case to the CBI, contending that the investigation carried out by the State police was biased against him. A single-judge dismissed his petition. He filed an appeal in 2019 which remained pending for 6 years until 2025 when Dileep decided to press for the CBI probe once again. In April this year, a division bench of the Court dismissed the appeal. .The trialThe trial commenced on March 8, 2018. At present the list of accused is as follows:A1. Sunil NS aka Pulsar SuniA2. Martin AntonyA3. Manikandan BA4. Vijeesh VPA5. Salim H aka Vadival Salim)A6. PradeepA7. Charlie ThomasA8. P Gopalakrishnan aka DileepA9. Sanilkumar aka Mesthiri SanilA15. Sarath G NairSanilkumar and Sarath G Nair were added as accused in a supplementary chargesheet filed during the course of the case. One accused, named Vishnu, turned approver for the prosecution. Two other accused, Vipin Lal BL and Aneesh PK were pardoned and examined as prosecution witnesses. Yet another duo accused in the case, advocate Pratheesh Chacko and his assistant Raju Joseph, were discharged during the course of the trial. Last week, third accused, Manikandan, reportedly attempted to take his own life. The accused have been charged under the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code:120B Criminal conspiracy;109 Abetment of offence;366 Kidnapping or abducting a woman;354 Assault of woman with intention to outrage her modesty;354B Use of criminal force on woman with intention to disrobe her;357 Use of criminal force to wrongfully confine a person;376D Gang rape;201 Causing disappearance of evidence; and212 Harbouring an offender; read with34 Acts done by several persons with common intention.They have also been charged under the Information Technology Act, 2008 for the illegal capture and alleged distribution of visuals of the assault.The entire trial was conducted in-camera (meaning behind closed doors and not open to public and press). .Judge, prosecution, and defense counselIn 2019, the case was assigned to then Additional Special Sessions Judge Honey M Varghese after the survivor sought a female judicial officer for the case.A year later, the prosecution sought permission to transfer the trial to another judge, citing several instances of the case being delayed on various pretexts. The prosecution, led by Special Public Prosecutor A Suresan, voiced its protest over some allegedly derogatory remarks made by the judge. Suresan resigned in December 2020.However, in November 2020, the Kerala High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the prosecution and the survivor to transfer the trial, and in 2022 the Supreme Court dismissed another petition filed by the actress to transfer the trial to another judge.In December 2021, Suresan's replacement Special Public Prosecutor Anil Kumar also handed in his resignation.The case was subsequently handled by Special Public Prosecutor V Ajakumar.Dileep has been represented by Senior Advocate B Raman Pillai before the trial court and the Kerala High Court and by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi before the Supreme Court.Judge Honey Varghese, who is now the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ernakulam, will be pronouncing the much awaited verdict on Monday..The trial saw many twists and turns which arguably contributed to its delay. Dileep approached the Supreme Court to set a time limit for completing the trial and the Kerala government approached the Supreme Court seeking an extension of the deadline by the top court. .WitnessesWhile digital evidence might be sufficient to either corroborate or contradict the survivor's version of the assault, Dileep's fate hinges on the establishment of criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. This is where witness testimony plays a key role..261 witnesses were examined, many of them film industry insiders. 28 among them turned hostile during trial, by revoking or refusing to attest to their initial statements that were damning to the defense, particularly Dileep. Actors Bhama and Siddique initially told the police that they had seen Dileep threatening the survivor but they denied the same in court. Actor Edavela Babu was the general secretary of Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) at the time. He too backtracked from his initial statements which indicated that the survivor had earlier filed a complaint with the organisation..The murder conspiracy tangentIn December 2021, the trial was nearing completion when a film director, Balachandra Kumar, gave an interview to the media and released some audio clips indicating close association between Dileep and Suni.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. The Kerala High Court granted the accused including Dileep anticipatory bail in the matter. However, it refused to quash the FIR.Balachandra Kumar passed away in December 2024. .The key evidence - memory card and its tamperingSoon after his arrest, Dileep moved the Supreme Court seeking access to a memory card which contained 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.Then there were allegations that the memory card was accessed illegally when it was in the custody of the trial court.In 2024, the survivor actress moved the Kerala High Court seeking a court-monitored probe by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the State police into the alleged unauthorised access. She also alleged that the visuals of the assault had been leaked. The High Court ordered the sessions court to conduct a fact-finding enquiry and allowed the survivor access to a copy of witness statements recorded during the enquiry.The survivor subsequently filed an application alleging that the fact finding enquiry was not conducted in "a fair, free and complete" manner. However, in October 2024, the High Court dismissed the same opining that the application raised an issue that warranted the filing of a fresh petition.During these proceedings, it was revealed that the State Forensic Science Lab found that the memory card was illegally accessed three times while it was in the custody of the court - twice in 2018 and once in 2021. The reports also stated that the hash value of the device had changed, which meant that the contents in the memory card may have been altered or downloaded.This prompted the High Court to deliver a judgment with guidelines on storage of digital evidence, openly acknowledging that the system had failed to protect the survivor. "The necessary conclusion would be that we failed to protect the victim's interest, which resulted in the violation of her fundamental constitutional right. The victim alleges that the contents of the video footage were copied and transmitted. The emotional and psychological harm being suffered by the victim is beyond imagination,"the Court said..The necessary conclusion would be that we failed to protect the victim's interest, which resulted in the violation of her fundamental constitutional right.Kerala High Court.In the face of this failure, the survivor was given little choice but to be brave. She issued an open statement in 2022 on social media. However, the biggest impact made by her was the act of reporting the assault itself years earlier, that too on the very day she was assaulted. Widespread protests followed and Kerala saw its own version of the #MeToo movement in #Avalkoppam (with her), a group of women actresses broke off from AMMA and started the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), and their work led the State government to constitute the Justice K Hema Committee to look at the issues plaguing the industry. The report of the Committee, which was made public only last year, revealed widespread sexual harassment in Mollywood. Allegations of rape and assault were made against several prominent actors including two of the witnesses who turned hostile in the trial, Siddique and Edavela Babu. All seventeen members of AMMA's executive committee tendered their resignation, including President and veteran actor Mohanlal.It is safe to say that the Malayalam film industry was never the same after February 17, 2017. Whatever be the verdict in the trial, the industry and society as a whole will be shaken once again on December 8..Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.
