The Kerala actress who was sexually assaulted, allegedly at the behest of cine actor Dileep, has moved the trial court to hold the remainder of trial in open court. .The trial in the case is currently underway at the Principal District and Sessions Court in Ernakulam before Judge Honey M Varghese. The trial, which has entered the final stage, is being conducted in-camera. However, the actress has now requested the Court to conduct the hearings in open court which would be accessible to the media and the public.The survivor has also moved a separate application to initiate contempt of court action against former Director General of Police (DGP) R Sreelekha over some remarks the officer made in a YouTube video. .Case HistoryIn February 2017, the actress was abducted and raped in a moving vehicle, allegedly at the behest of Dileep, who at the time was one of the most influential and powerful players in the Malayalam film industry. Dileep reportedly had a personal score to settle with the actress, allegedly because she told his ex-wife Manju Warrier that he was engaged in an extra-marital affair.Six persons were arrested and arrayed as accused.In July 2017, Dileep was arrested and charged under various offences under the IPC, including Sections 366 (kidnapping), 120B (criminal conspiracy) , and 376D (gangrape).His first two attempts at getting bail were rejected by the Kerala High Court until October 2017 when the Court finally granted him bail after he had remained in custody for 83 days.In November 2019, the Supreme Court partly allowed a plea filed by Dileep seeking access to a memory card which contains video footage of the assault. While he was not permitted to receive a copy of the memory card, he was granted permission to inspect the contents of the same – subject to some caveats – in order to present an effective defence.Nearly a year later, citing several instances of the case being delayed on various pretexts, and certain allegations and imputations being made against the Prosecutor and the Special Prosecutor specifically, the prosecution prayed for leave to move the High Court for a transfer of the case.However, in November 2020, the Kerala High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the prosecution and the survivor to transfer the trial from the Additional Sessions Court presently hearing the matter to another Judge.Prior to that, the Additional Special Sessions Court had rejected the plea to transfer the trial.The prosecution in the case, led by Special Public Prosecutor A Suresan, had voiced its protest over some allegedly derogatory remarks made by the Additional Sessions Court Judge hearing the assault matter. Suresan resigned in December 2020.In December 2021, Suresan's replacement Special Public Prosecutor Anil Kumar also handed in his resignation.After the survivor wrote to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan seeking a fair trial, the Kerala government approached the Supreme Court seeking a 6-month extension on the time limit stipulated by the top court for completion of trial. The deadline is set to expire on February 16 this year.In January, the survivor took to social media with her first public statement on her journey as a survivor and the many trials and tribulations she had to face since the woeful incident took place.The State prosecution then approached the Supreme Court seeking an extension of time to complete the trial in the assault case. The top court disposed of the same stating that it was up to the trial court to take an appropriate decision in that regard.In the meantime, the Kerala High Court allowed the prosecution to summon 5 additional witnesses and declined to quash further investigation and dismissed Dileep's plea in that regard.The trial was nearing completion when a film director, Balachandra Kumar, gave an interview to media and released some audio clips indicating close association between Dileep, who is the 8th accused in the case, and Pulsar Suni, the 1st accused.The clips and Kumar's statements allegedly revealed a conspiracy to kill the police officers who were involved in the investigation of the actress assault case.This led to registration of a fresh FIR against Dileep and five others.The Kerala High Court later granted the accused, including Dileep, anticipatory bail in the matter. However, it refused to quash the FIR.The actress then moved the High Court in 2022 alleging that the memory card which holds visuals of the attack and which was seized as evidence, was accessed, copied and transmitted without authorisation.In December last year, the High Court had the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to conduct a fact-finding enquiry into these allegations.Once the enquiry was conducted, the survivor had to approach the High Court again to get access to the fact-finding report and the High Court directed the Sessions Court to provide a copy of the report.The survivor-actress subsequently filed an application alleging that the fact finding enquiry headed by the sessions judge was not conducted in "a fair, free and complete" manner as directed by the High Court.However, in October this year, the Court dismissed the same opining that the application raised an issue that warranted the filing of a fresh petition.
