“It is the prosecution and not the defence that is delaying this case,” said advocate B Raman Pillai who is representing actor Dileep in the 2017 actress abduction and sexual assault case. 

On September 16, 2024, the Kerala government accused Dileep, who is alleged to have orchestrated the entire crime, of obstructing the trial. The state made this submission in an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court while opposing the bail application filed by Pulsar Suni, the prime accused in the case. 

On September 17, the Supreme Court granted bail to Suni on grounds that he has been under incarceration for over seven years while other co-accused, including Dileep, are out on bail. 

Meanwhile, the Pinarayi Vijayan government said that Dileep is attempting to undermine and extend the trial indefinitely. 

“This is not surprising. The government has been accusing us of this for a long time,” said Raman Pillai. He added that it is not the defence but the prosecution, that is the survivor's legal team, which is causing the delay in the trial.  

“They’ve filed two transfer petitions in between. It has extended the process,” he said. 

The trial for this case began in January 2020. Judge Honey M Varghese was appointed after the survivor requested a female judge. 

However, ten months later, the survivor filed a petition stating that she was “suffering a second trauma” as the judge was “biased and hostile.” The special public prosecutor, A Suresan, also filed an affidavit with the Kerala High Court regarding some of the derogatory remarks being made by Judge Honey Varghese. 

In November 2020, Suresan resigned after the High Court rejected his petition. Advocate VV Anil Kumar, who was appointed as the next special public prosecutor, also walked out of the case in December 2021. In his resignation letter, he wrote that the atmosphere during the hearing was “uncongenial.”

Currently, advocate Aja Kumar is the special public prosecutor. 

In 2022, the Supreme Court rejected a plea once again filed by the survivor seeking the transfer of the judge. She had alleged in her petition that one of the main accused in the case has connections with the trial court judge. 

In their recent affidavit, the Kerala government told the Supreme Court that Dileep was stalling the investigation through lengthy cross-examinations of the accused and witnesses in the case. 

They explained that while all the advocates of all the other accused cross-examined the Investigating Officer, Baiju Paulose, for one and a half days, Dileep’s lawyers took 87 days across seven months to cross-examine him. 

While the prosecution and counsels of other accused finished cross-examination of the survivor in three days, Dileep took seven days. Dileep’s lawyers took 35.5 days to cross-examine director Balachandrakumar, who was close to Dileep and then turned whistleblower. Sai Shankar, who was allegedly employed by Dileep to destroy material on his phone and later turned an approver in the case, was questioned for 10 days.

The state government also opposed Pulsar Suni’s bail and said that if granted bail release, he could possibly hamper the trial or abscond the legal process. 

“It is quite definite that such a person will make all efforts possible to torpedo the trial process either by absconding from the legal process or by threatening the privacy of the victim by publishing the visuals of sexual assault on the victim. If the accused is released on bail, that will cause serious prejudice, especially when the trial is nearing to conclude shortly,” it added. 

The government also said that the trial is expected to go on for more than 30 days, as both the prosecution and the 10 accused will have to present their arguments.