The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notice to State of Kerala on the bail plea by Pulsar Suni, the prime accused in the 2017 actress abduction and sexual assault case in which Malayalam cine actor Dileep is an accused [Suni NS vs State of Kerala]..The bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Bela M Trivedi initially also ordered interim protection from arrest to Suni. However, the bench was informed that Suni was already in jail and that it was a regular bail plea. The matter will now be heard on April 25, 2022.Advocates K Parameshwar, Sriram Parakkat and Satheesh Mohanan appeared for Suni. .Suni has challenged a March 29 order of the Kerala High Court denying him bail.The plea filed by Suni said that the examination of almost all witnesses is complete and the investigating agency has started further investigation."Invariably there will be much more witnesses to be examined after further investigation and there is no likelihood of the case coming to a conclusion in the near future," the petition stated.It was further submitted that the conduct of Suni during the trial has been impeccable and he has never caused any obstruction or given any chance to the court or the prosecutor to make any adverse comments against him.The plea also pointed out that the prime accused in the case are already out in bail..In 2017, six persons, including Suni were arrested and arrayed as accused after a prominent female actor was abducted, driven around in a car, photographed and sexually assaulted, allegedly at actor Dileep’s behest.Sunil NS, also known by his moniker Pulsar Suni, is the first accused in the infamous case which is alleged to have been the result of a conspiracy that was hatched between the accused.Suni had allegedly revealed to investigators that prominent figures from the Malayalam Film Industry, including Dileep, were not only involved in the crime, but were also the masterminds behind it.The trial in the case is currently underway at the at the Additional Sessions (CBI special No III) Court at Ernakulam.The case registered against the petitioner and others alleged offences punishable under Sections 342, 366, 376D, 506(i), 212, 201, 120(b) r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act..[Read live account of hearing below]
