Actor abduction and rape case: Who is madam behind quotation?
KOCHI: While acquitting actor Dileep in the 2017 actor abduction and sexual assault case, the trial court observed that the first accused Pulsar Suni had initially claimed that the quotation for the crime came from a madam, and the prosecution was duty-bound to investigate that angle. The order, accessed by TNIE , stated that Suni had first claimed the quotation originated from a woman but later changed his version and alleged that it was at the instance of actor Dileep. If this be the situation, the prosecution is bound to conduct an investigation into the so-called involvement of the lady claimed by Suni during the commission of the offence. In this context, considering the fact that the prosecution failed to prove conspiracy between Suni and Dileep, the suppression of matters relating to Sreelakshmi, Shiny Thomas, and Kevin Thomas assumes relevance. The prosecution ought to have ruled out the involvement of those persons in the commission of the offence, the order stated. The court also held that there was no clear evidence that the first accused received money from Dileep. It found inconsistencies in the claim that a phone reached the prison and that, using this phone, Nadhirsha was contacted to seek money from Dileep. There was no clear proof for this. Nor was there evidence of a conspiracy involving Dileep. Martin Antony and Manikandan B The court observed that the letter written by Pulsar Suni to Dileep demanding money did not bear Sunis handwriting, which weakened the attempt to establish a connection between them. The survivor did not initially give any statement against Dileep. His alleged involvement was identified by the police, who later arrested him. Therefore, the usual weight given to a survivors statement in sexual assault cases did not extend to the allegations against Dileep. The prosecution argued that Dileep and Suni were acquainted, had been seen together at various places, and had appeared under the same mobile tower locations. However, the court found these circumstances insufficient to establish a conspiracy. The trial court did not criticise the decision to arrest Dileep, stating that an investigating officer has the authority to arrest based on available information and evidence. The court also questioned why Jinson, Pulsar Sunis fellow inmate, was not made an accused, noting that he was a prosecution witness. Meanwhile, the investigation team failed to establish that Dileep had deleted digital records. No digital evidence supporting the allegations raised by the investigation team was presented. The prosecutions claim that Dileep instructed the accused to include the ring in the visuals to help identify the survivor was rejected by the court. It noted that this allegation appeared for the first time only in the final report. Similarly, the claim that the conspiracy between Dileep and Pulsar Suni began in 2013 lacked supporting evidence showing where Suni was or what he was doing during that time. N S Sunil (Pulsar Suni) and Vijeesh V P The allegation that Suni had worked as actor Mukeshs driver while absconding after the crime was also not proven. The prosecution did not produce evidence to substantiate the statements of Balachandrakumar, a key witness. The devices allegedly used by Dileep to view the visuals were never recovered. The complete version of the phone messages that Balachandrakumar claimed belonged to Dileep was also not submitted. Actor abduction case down the lane Feb 17, 2017: A six-member gang led by Pulsar Suni abducts and assaults a Malayalam actor in a moving car near Athani, Ernakulam Feb 18, 2017: Nedumbassery police register an FIR based on the First Information given by the survivor before P K Radhamany, the then woman police officer. The survivors driver Martin Antony is arrested Feb 19, 2017: Police arrest Vadival Salim and Pradeep Feb 23, 2017: Prime accused Pulsar Suni and accomplice Vijeesh V P attempt to surrender before the court, but police take them into custody from the courtroom at District Court complex, Ernakulam. The duo had jumped the court wall in an effort to enter and surrender before the court without being detected by the police April 18, 2017: Babu Kumar, DySP, who initially probed the case, files the chargesheet against six accused persons including Pulsar Suni, before JFCM, Angamaly May 18, 2017: Baiju Poulose M was appointed as the new Investigating Officer. A report regarding further investigation was filed by police upon receiving information about a criminal conspiracy involving more suspects including Dileep in the case July 10, 2017: Actor Dileep arrested and lodged in Aluva sub-jail October 3, 2017: After spending 85 days in jail, Dileep gets bail January 6, 2020: Trial court frames charges against Dileep and nine others March 1, 2021: Supreme Court grants six more months to the trial court to complete the trial December 25, 2021: Director Balachandra Kumar, a close associate of Dileep, makes several disclosures against Dileep, and SIT begins further investigation based on the revelation January 9, 2022: Police file a new FIR against Dileep and five others following audio clips submitted by Balachandra Kumar July 22, 2022: Further investigation is concluded and an additional final report is filed, adding Sections 201 and 204 against Dileep December 11, 2024: Final hearing begins in trial court. January 23, 2025: The arguments of prosecution completed. The court examined 261 witnesses. November 25, 2025: The trial court decides to pronounce the verdict on December 8. December 8, 2025: The trial court acquits actor Dileep. The court finds six other accused persons, including Pulsar Suni, guilty. December 12, 2025: The trial court sentences all six convicts, including prime accused Pulsar Suni, to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment.
17 C
