On Tuesday, the Supreme Court refused to admit the Kerala government’s request to transfer a judge in a lower court hearing the sexual assault case against movie star Dileep.
A bench of three judges headed by Judge AM Khanwilkar found no reason to hold bias against the judge for his comments.
“He has collected a statement from the judge to allege partiality. What circumstances were created to make such statements … much depends on it. Where is the issue of bias? “asked the court, also composed of judges BR Gavai and Krishna Murari.
Lead attorney Ranjit Kumar, who appeared for the indictment, told the court that the charge sheet was presented in January and a month later the prosecution filed a request to modify the charges. To date, no decision has been made.
In addition, he claimed that a fair trial is not possible in the current court, as the eighth defendant, actor Dileep, aka P Gopalakrishnan, filed a petition to send the cloned copy of the seized memory card for a second examination by the central forensic science laboratory. (CFSL) without providing the same to the prosecution or victim. The copy of the CFSL report was not shared with the prosecution prior to cross-examination, according to the petition.
“The procedure adopted by the presiding judge is to favor the eighth defendant,” Kumar said, adding that on October 14, the presiding judge commented that what is happening in court is not prosecution but “prostitution.” Before that, the judge ordered the prosecution witnesses not to meet with the special prosecutor.
The prosecution further claimed that the trial judge had remained a “silent bystander” when the victim was “harassed and intimidated” by the defendant’s lawyers during cross-examination.
The Supreme Court was not impressed by the accusations made by the state. “He is complicating his own case and putting pressure on the judge. Do not make such accusations of bias. Let the courts run and the judges do their job. How is it that there is so much pressure and media hype created in this case and these accusations (of partiality) will unnecessarily discourage the judge ”, observed the court.
The state was given the option of replacing the special prosecutor or going to superior court if the request to modify the charges against the accused is not accepted.
“If the prosecutor does not feel comfortable, put someone else in his place, but do not file a bias complaint against the judge,” the court said, dismissing the state government’s appeal.
However, the order clarified that the state’s dismissal of the appeal will not be an obstacle for the state to continue with its pending application before the trial judge or seek redress for the adverse comments made by the presiding judge.
The state informed the superior court that it will take some time to replace the prosecutor appearing in the case.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place in February 2017. The victim, who has worked in several films in South India, was kidnapped and allegedly abused inside her car. The defendant had made his way to the car on the night of February 17, 2017 and even filmed the entire incident to blackmail the actor. In total, there were ten defendants of whom the police arrested seven people. Actor Dileep was later arrested and joined as the eighth defendant. He was released on bail in October 2017 after being incarcerated for nearly three months.
.
