Plea to revoke Dileep's bail: Prosecution ordered to produce evidence

Actor Dileep arrives at the Crime Branch office Kalamassery in Kochi, Sunday, Jan 23, 2022, in connection with a case registered against him and five others for allegedly threatening officials probing the sexual assault of an actress in 2017. Photo: PTI

Kochi: The trial court handling the 2017 actress attack case has directed the prosecution to produce evidence to back its reasons for cancelling accused actor Dileep's bail and gave time for the same till May 26, when the matter has been posted for next hearing.

As premise for cancelling the bail, the latter relied on a couple of audio clips that suggested that the accused tried to influence the court and witnesses.

The court has sought to know from the prosecution whether being accused in another case pertaining to the conspiracy to eliminate investigation officers is reason enough for cancelling Dileep's bail in the previous case registered over the sexual assault of the actress.

The court pointed out that Dileep's bail order did not contain any condition that the actor is not supposed to become an accused in any other criminal case during the bail period.

The court has taken a position that cancellation of bail granted to an accused is not similar to rejecting a bail application or granting bail in a case. The prosecution should be able to produce concrete evidence before the court for cancellation of bail.

At this stage the prosecution informed the trial court that the high court had earlier pointed out that the conspiracy case against Dileep was prima facie maintainable. At the same time the prosecution raised a grave argument before the same trial court that Dileep, the eighth accused in the 2017 case, tried to influence the witnesses besides the trial court.

Audio clips submitted

The prosecution also submitted two audio clips which were found in the mobile phone of Dileep's brother-in-law T N Sooraj as evidence on attempt to influence the trial court.

The audio clip contains the telephonic conversation between the lawyer of the accused and Sooraj.

The prosecution argued that the audio clip contained conversations which clearly indicated how the advocate of the accused had tutored Sooraj to influence the trial court.

The prosecution also handed over another voice clip, which came out in the public domain earlier.

Witnesses likely influenced

The investigation team also submitted before the trial court the list of witnesses influenced by the accused besides a detailed report regarding the manner in which the accused and their advocates together tried to bring the witnesses to their side.

Public prosecutor irks judge

Meanwhile, the public prosecutor’s statement that "the court believes that Dileep's version is completely true and the prosecution's version is totally wrong," provoked the trial court.

The court warned the prosecution against making such statements.

Trial court judge Honey M Varghese said in the open court: "the duty of the trial court is not to save the prosecution or Dileep but to ensure justice."

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Onmanorama. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.
Login to comment