KOCHI: The survivor in the 2017 actor abduction and sexual assault case on Friday approached the Kerala High Court, seeking to quash the report filed by the then trial judge regarding the illegal access of the memory card during court’s custody.
The survivor also sought an investigation into the unauthorised and illegal access to the memory card and pen drive, as well as the possible copying and transmission of the eight video recordings of the crime, by appointing a special investigation team (SIT) under the supervision of the High Court. She also sought a directive to include a cyber or digital forensic expert in the SIT.
The petition stated that the illegal access to the video recordings of the gang rape of the survivor, while they were in the custody of the court, not only infringed upon her inviolable right to dignity and privacy but also raised serious concerns regarding the security of sensitive evidence.
The inquiry authority failed to make any finding regarding Mahesh Mohan, a former court staff member, allegedly removing the pen drive and memory card from the court’s custody for over five months, and conducted no further inquiry into the matter, the survivor said.
The forensic examination had earlier revealed, “The memory card was accessed on the night of January 9, 2018, and December 13, 2018, at 9.58 pm and 10.58 pm, respectively. The third access was done on July 19, 2021, from 12.19 pm to 12.54 pm.” Based on this, the High Court had directed the district and sessions judge, Ernakulam to conduct a fact-finding inquiry into the alleged illegal access and file a report.
The report stated that Leena Rasheed, the then JFCM, Angamaly, Mahesh Mohan, senior clerk to the then principal and sessions judge who is now a judge of the Kerala High Court, and Thajudeen, then shirstadar of the trial court, Ernakulam, had accessed it. However, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against two, Mahesh Mohan and Thajudeen.
The petition stated that the illegal access of the video recordings of the gang rape also re-victimised her while she awaited justice. Further, this heinous attack on her dignity and privacy has re-traumatised the survivor, who was already suffering extreme trauma and distress due to the abduction and gang rape.
SURVIVOR’S ALLEGATIONS
1. Despite an explicit statement of the then sessions judge that he never had personal possession of the pen drive and memory card containing the video recordings of the gang rape, the inquiry authority in its supplementary report did not amend and rectify its earlier finding that the concerned electronic evidence remained safe in the court’s custody. Moreover, after the discovery that the pen drive and memory card were in the personal possession of senior clerk Mahesh Mohan for over five months, no further inquiry was done into the same.
2. Even after the revelation, the inquiry authority did not conduct any further inquiry into the possible transmission and copying of contents from the pen drive. Moreover, the report does not highlight or bring this clear illegality to the attention of the high court.
