Thread by @barandbench

[Actor Assault and Abduction Case against actor #Dileep] Kerala High Court will shortly hear pleas seeking the transfer of trial of the abduction and assault case in which actor Dileep is a prime accused.

The survivor of the assault together with the prosecution moved the High Court alleging bias on the part of the Additional Sessions Judge hearing the matter.

They have stated that continuing the trial at the Court would defeat the ends of justice and would prejudice the trial.

They had earlier sought a similar relief from the Trial Court, which was rejected.
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

The Trial, which was scheduled to to resume on November 3, has been deferred till today.

Read an account of the previous proceedings before the Court here:
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

Hearing begins.

The Public Prosecutor Suman Chakravarthy reads Section 407A of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the High Court's power to transfer cases.

"We sought to avoid confrontation with the Court, we tried to adjust to a maximum, but we reached a tipping point" when the victim was cross-examined continuously for hours: the Prosecutor submits

He (Accused 8, Dileep) tried to prolong the case in one way or another, he adds.

The prosecution reads a judgment.

The victim has to demonstrate that circumstances exist that call for a transfer of case: PP

These circumstances exist in this case, and we were not sitting as mute spectators. We brought these circumstances to the Court's notice repeatedly: PP

Imagine the feelings of the victim when she had to detail her ordeal, that too before the 15-20 advocates in the courtroom!: PP

The kind of cross examination in the case with so many lawyers in the courtroom completely defeated the purpose of an in camera trial: PP

Even the prosecutor was unable to function, the Court itself was against him: PP

He is a seasoned prosecutor, is he not: Judge

Yes, and he was not able to conduct trial in this court: PP

It is settled law that a judge cannot sit as a mute spectator in a rape trial: PP states

The Judge ought to have referred the prosecution's grievances to the High Court which appointed her, instead she heard dormant petitions made by the accused and took it up on a daily basis. After this, she recorded that the prosecutor was absent: Chakravarthy.

Sr Adv Sreekumar begins his submissions on behalf of the survivor.

Recounts the harassment faced by the victim throughout proceedings in the Trial Court.

Sr Adv Sreekumar is now speaking about a sealed cover Forensic Science Laboratory Report that was delivered to the accused 8 (Dileep) to the exclusion of the prosecutor and the victim.

Was not this report pursuant to certain queries raised by the accused?: Judge

We did not even get an opportunity to see the petition filed in respect of this: Chakravarthy

This is against justice: he adds

Why did you not object the order (that allowed the accused to get the report in a sealed cover). Such a failure could amount to acquiescence: Judge

The Government Pleader and Sr Adv Sreekumar seek to show that the acts of the Judge were not fair and transparent.

Why do you say that the Judge was biased towards the accused: Judge

The kind of questions that were allowed to put to me (the Victim) for around 9-10 days, that were irrelevant and maligned my character shows this!, Sr Adv Sreekumar says

Even after the trial was deferred, the Presiding Judge went ahead and heard interim petitions in the case!: Sr Adv Sreekumar

The Trial Judge did not halt hearing the matter even after the prosecution expressed its reservations: the Prosecution

Egos apart, justice will suffer: Justice VG Arun

We did all we could to cooperate: Government Pleader and Sr. Adv. Sreekumar.

Justice VG Arun proceeds to reserve the matter for orders.
Interim Order (deferring trial) to continue till Friday.