Kochi: In a major development in the controversial actor assault case, the survivor has approached the Kerala High Court alleging violation of her fundamental right after a probe confirmed unauthorised access to the memory card, a crucial evidence in the case.
The probe revealed that the memory card was accessed three times. Actor Dileep is one of the accused in the case.
In 2023, the High Court directed the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to conduct a fact-finding enquiry on the allegations raised by the survivor in the 2017 actor sexual assault case pertaining to unauthorized access and copy and transfer of the visuals from the memory card and pen drive relating to the incident while it was in court custody.
The survivor alleged that the fact-finding inquiry was conducted in secrecy denying even her an opportunity to participate in it. The survivor alleged that after the inquiry was over, she was even denied a copy of the report of the fact-finding report and was constrained to approach the Court to obtain it. It is alleged that the survivor was not provided records of the inquiry report or depositions of witnesses and this shows malafides on the part of the inquiry authority.
The survivor approached the Court with two applications, the first application was to seek copies of statements of persons examined in the fact-finding inquiry. The Second application seeks to set aside the inquiry report on the unauthorised access of the memory card dated January 08, 2024, submitted by the Ernakulam Sessions and District Judge.
Justice K Babu's bench ordered to provide certified copies of the statements recorded by the trial court in the case.
“Petitioner sought statements of persons examined during the inquiry to ascertain the veracity of the inquiry report. There is no reason to decline the reliefs sought. The Sessions judge is directed to henceforth issue copies of statements of persons who were examined in the inquiry,” stated the Court.
The survivor demanded to quash the probe report on the memory card's unauthorised access alleging that the district session judge took a stance to protect his colleagues.
Meanwhile, Dileep's counsel questioned the leak of the inquiry report which was only provided to the survivor. He raised the issue before the court as the media discussed the details of the inquiry report.
(With Live Law inputs)
