KOCHI: With the Supreme Court rejecting Dileep's demand for the video footage of the victim in the controversial actor abduction case, Dileep has approached the Additional Sessions Court in Kochi seeking mirror images of 32 electronic devices from which digital evidence was extracted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT).
The prosecution suspects it as an attempt to delay the trial as Special Prosecutor in the case raised the matter at the court when the petition came up for hearing here on Tuesday.
Dileep's counsel stated that digital evidence collected from around 32 electronic devices seized from accused and witnesses considered as documents in the case were not handed over to them by the prosecution yet. Citing the Supreme Court directive in the case, the counsel claimed that they are entitled to receive these pieces of evidence under section 207 of CrPC.
These documents are vital in proving the innocence of Dileep in the case, the counsel said. He also claimed that they require mirror images of these devices including the report given by State Forensic Laboratory which extracted and examined these devices. This is to verify whether there is more evidence against Dileep in these digital devices. Only mirror images and cloned videos will ensure that SIT did not tamper with evidence.
Special Prosecutor A Sureshan, on the other hand, claimed that attempts are made to protract the trial even though Supreme Court has directed to complete it within six months. According to him, there are obscene videos and pictures of other persons in these digital devices which will infringe the privacy of others who are not even aware of such contents. He submitted that prosecution will not rely on the documents asked by Dileep's counsel during the trial as it has no links with the case. The available evidence with the prosecution has been shared with the counsels of the accused persons.
Even the court asked the purpose behind getting the images and videos that have no connection with the case. Later, the court reserved its order in the petition on December 11.
Dileep's counsel filed another petition seeking two weeks time period to complete the examination of video footage of the victim with the help of an expert as directed by the Supreme Court. According to him, the expert from another state has to be identified and brought here for the purpose. However, the court orally stated that two weeks time period cannot be granted for the purpose.
Meanwhile, two sureties who executed the bail for ninth accused Sanal Kumar who absconded after the release were asked to produce him on December 11. Unnikrishnan and Abdul Rahman who stood as the sureties were told that in case of failure in producing Sanal, both will have to pay Rs 80,000 each. The court also heard the bail petitions filed by Martin Antony, Vijesh and Pradeep. The court has reserved its order in bail petitions on December 11.