Observing that prima facie there are materials to suspect the involvement of Malayalam film actor Dileep in the case relating to the sexual assault on a woman actor, the Kerala High Court on Monday turned down his bail plea.
Dismissing his bail petition, the court observed that “the case is unique, considering its seriousness, meticulous planning, cruel nature of execution and being a crime executed to wreak vengeance on a woman by engaging criminals, to sexually abuse her. Courts have to be circumspect in granting bail in such cases.”
Adding that “the commission of the crime is so cruel and diabolic and liable to shake the conscience of society,” the court noted that a young actor was abducted from the busiest National Highway, taken through the city for about two and half hours, and “subjected to the shocking ordeal of sexual assault and video graphed, inside a moving car.”
Missing memory card
The court said the investigation was still progressing and was at a crucial stage. The possibility of implicating other persons in the crime had not been ruled out by the prosecution. Besides, the crucial material object which was the mobile phone, used for recording the sexual assault and the memory card in which the videographed material was stored, had not been recovered. “The memory card is a potential threat to the life of the victim and there is every possibility of the accused attempting to interfere in the investigation and prosecution with the memory card.”
‘Too early’
The petitioner, being a noted film actor, was involved in the distribution and production of films and was also owner of a movie hall. Definitely, he must be wielding considerable command on the industry. Hence, the possibility of the petitioner influencing or threatening several witnesses from the same industry could not be ruled out. The court, therefore, concluded that it was too early at this stage to grant bail to the petitioner.
Director General of Prosecution Manjeri Sreedharan Nair had argued that there were “cogent, clinching, direct and indirect, circumstantial and scientific evidence” to establish that the petitioner had conspired with the first accused ‘Pulsar’ Suni to execute the crime.
