KOCHI: The state government on Friday told the Kerala High Court that the evidence on record "beyond any shadow of doubt" establishes that actor Dileep had given the ‘quotation’ to sexually assault the Malayalam actor who survived the 2017 abduction and assault case, despite his acquittal by the trial court.
The submission was made in the state’s appeal challenging the acquittal of Dileep and three others — Charly Thomas, Sanilkumar alias Mesthiri Sanil, and Sarath G Nair. The state has sought to set aside their acquittal and convict them. It has also sought enhancement of the sentence awarded to the six convicted accused, including Sunil N S alias Pulsar Suni.
In its appeal, the prosecution described Dileep as the “master conspirator” and argued that the Sessions Court adopted a flawed approach while evaluating evidence against him. It contended that the trial judge dissected the charges in isolation and applied a separate standard while assessing the evidence relating to Counts 1 to 11 against Dileep.
According to the state, key evidence pointing to Dileep’s role in the conspiracy was segregated and assessed independently, instead of being considered as part of the larger chain of events. Reliable and legally admissible evidence was rejected arbitrarily, leading to his acquittal, the appeal said.
The state further argued that the trial court overlooked the primary conspiracy allegedly hatched between Dileep and Pulsar Suni, and instead focused only on the execution conspiracy among Accused 1 to 6. While portions of evidence relating to criminal conspiracy were relied upon to convict the six accused, the same standard was not applied to Dileep, it contended.
The prosecution maintained that Dileep and the six convicted accused were part of a single chain of conspiracy and are legally liable for the acts committed by each conspirator. It also asserted that clear and cogent evidence was produced to establish motive on Dileep’s part against the survivor.
Additionally, the state termed the sentence awarded to the convicted accused as “highly disproportionate and inadequate,” noting that only the minimum punishment was imposed for the principal offence of gang rape and that appropriate punishment was not awarded for certain other offences despite conviction.
The appeal seeks the conviction of the acquitted accused and maximum punishment for the convicted persons.