[Breaking] Actor Sexual Assault Case : Kerala High Court Defers Trial Till November 6 On Transfer Plea On Prosecution, Victim

The High Court of Kerala on Monday ordered that the ongoing trial in the sensational actor sexual assault case will stand deferred till November 6.

A single bench of Justice V G Arun passed the order on the applications filed by the prosecution and the victim of the crime seeking transfer of the case to another court. The High Court will consider the matter further on November 6.

Senior Advocate S.Sreekumar, appearing for the victim of the crime, told the court that she had to undergo an "ordeal" of continuous cross-examination for nine days by a battery of lawyers of the accused, where highly objectionable questions affecting her character were raised. Though the prosecution raised objections at such questions, the court did nothing to protect the victim, submitted the senior lawyer.

"The trial judge and the prosecutor are now at loggerheads. The judge has made remarks against the prosecutor and has read out the contents of an anonymous letter against the prosecutor. It is not possible to continue trial in that court in such a scenario. Since the prosecution itself has expressed doubts about the bona fides of the judge and expressed no-confidence, how can the victim place faith in the court", Mr. Sreekumar submitted.

Responding to a query from the bench, Sreekumar submitted that the transfer of the case will not affect the deadline set by the Supreme Court to complete the trial.

The public prosecutor, Suman Chakravarthy, told the bench that the trial judge was not even ready to record the objections raised by the prosecution, and started recording them only after the prosecutor threatened to walk out of the courtroom. 

Mr.Chakravarthy informed the bench that the affidavit of the Special Prosecutor, A Sureshan, narrating various events during the trial, has been placed before the bench.

Justice V G Arun asked if the approach of the judge, even if said to be flawed or mistaken, amounts to reflecting bias on the part of the judge. To this, Mr. Chakravarthy replied that justice should also be seen to be done and that the entire sequence of events will show that the trial is not proceeding in a "fair and transparent" manner. The approach adopted by the trial judge is "unheard of" in a criminal trial, the prosecutor added. 

It is only rarely that the prosecution itself will come forward with a request to transfer the case, the prosecutor pointed out.

The prosecutor also suggested to the bench to call for a report from the presiding judge to ascertain if the officer is still interested in handling the case amidst the controversy.

When Justice Arun asked why the transfer was sought now after the examination of nearly 80 witnesses, the prosecutor replied that oral objections before the trial court were raised at earlier stages and that the prosecution was hoping to see a change in the trial judge's approach before taking a drastic step of seeking the change of the court.