- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Actor Assault Case : Supreme Court...
Actor Assault Case : Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Examination Of Witnesses, Seeks Progress Report On Trial
Rintu Mariam Biju
17 Feb 2023 7:51 PM IST
In the 2017 case related to abduction and sexual assault of a Kerala actor, the Supreme Court on Friday refused to pass any order to interfere with the examination of witnesses in the ongoing trial before the Court at Ernakulam.The accused in the case, prominent Malayalam actor Dileep, had taken objection to the move made by the prosecution to examine 41 additional witnesses shortly ahead of...
In the 2017 case related to abduction and sexual assault of a Kerala actor, the Supreme Court on Friday refused to pass any order to interfere with the examination of witnesses in the ongoing trial before the Court at Ernakulam.
The accused in the case, prominent Malayalam actor Dileep, had taken objection to the move made by the prosecution to examine 41 additional witnesses shortly ahead of the January 31 deadline set for the trial. He alleged that it was an attempt by the prosecution to protract the trial.
The State of Kerala informed the Court that it is seeking to examine 32 witnesses and said that the trial can be completed within 30 days. On the previous hearing date (February 13), the Court had questioned the State about the need to examine the additional witnesses, following which it file an affidavit giving reasons.
The Court today said that it is not getting into the issue of relevancy of witnesses. "Should this court get into all this?", it asked.
After the hearing, the bench comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar recorded in the order :
"During the hearing, it was told that only 32 witnesses have to be examined. We direct the trial court to take appropriate steps to examine the witnesses. Learned Senior counsel for the parties has assured that they shall cooperate during the examination of the witnesses. The Trial court shall send a report on progress of the trial on or before the next date.”
The matter will come up next on March 24.
'Accused can't dictate which witness should be examined'
Accused Dileep can’t dictate which witness is relevant and should be examined before the trial court, the senior counsel R Basant appearing for the survivor said during the hearing.
“After the fireworks are over here, I have something to say; one word for the victim. Very shockingly gruesome incident! Everyone is interested in the trial being completed at the earliest. But in the interest of early trial, let not the accused dictate which witness have to be examined. That is something unknown to law. It is impermissible in our system of law for the accused to choose which witness should be examined/relevant. Everyone wants the trial to be over…”, Basant submitted.
“We are not saying anything about it”, the Bench said.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Dileep said that every time the deadline comes to a close, there’s an application filed for examining additional witnesses. He made this argument even during the previous hearing. Along with Rohatgi, Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave also appeared for Dileep.
“They should say how much time they will need to complete”, the Bench said.
Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the State government said that 30 working days would be required to complete examination of the remaining witnesses in the trial against Dileep. He added,
“If we take 1 hour for examination in chief, they take 6. That is what is happening”.
Rohatgi, at this stage said, after examining 237 witnesses, the other side wants to examine over 40 others now.
“The way they are behaving, they first wanted change of judge. Your Lordships may keep this after 30 days, see what happens and give levy to the judge to decide whether every person that they are producing is relevant or not. The Judge not a post office! 500 witnesses come so that the trial never ends”.
This prompted Basant to raise his concerns.
Rohatgi added that four extensions for concluding trial were granted by the Top Court, spread over three years.
He also took objection to the Kerala High Court on its administrative side refusing to allow the Trial Judge to hold a camp in Trivandrum to examine a very crucial witness who was in hospital, despite both sides agreeing to it. The witness, the senior advocate said, is now appearing in TV every day. The Court refused to comment on this too.
During the previous hearing, the Court had asked the Kerala State government why the trial before the Ernakulam court in Kerala actor sexual assault case in which Malayalam actor Dileep is an accused was being protracted.
Case Title: P Gopalkrishnan @Dileep v State of Kerala | M.A in Criminal Appeal No. 1794/2019
