Kerala court acquits actor Dileep, convicts six others in 2017 sexual assualt case

Kochi

In a major judgment that closes one of Kerala’s most closely watched criminal trials, the Ernakulam Principal Sessions Court on Monday acquitted Malayalam actor Dileep of all charges in the 2017 abduction and sexual-assault case involving a prominent woman actor. 

The verdict, delivered eight years after the crime shook the state and sparked widespread discussions on misogyny and power structures in the Malayalam film industry, found that the prosecution had failed to prove conspiracy charges against Dileep beyond reasonable doubt. At the same time, the court convicted six other accused, including the prime accused Pulsar Suni, for their direct involvement in the violent abduction, assault and filming of the crime.

The case dates back to the night of February 17, 2017, when the actress was abducted while travelling from Thrissur to Kochi. The attackers confined her inside a moving vehicle, assaulted her, and allegedly filmed the act to blackmail her. The incident created national outrage and triggered a wave of solidarity within the film industry, leading to the formation of the Women in Cinema Collective, which pushed strongly for accountability in the case. Within days, police arrested the first accused, Sunil NS alias Pulsar Suni, and his accomplices. For months, the investigation focused on the direct perpetrators until mid-2017, when statements and alleged links hinted at a possible larger conspiracy.

On July 10, 2017, actor Dileep was arrested after investigators claimed they possessed evidence indicating that he orchestrated the crime as an act of personal vengeance. His arrest sent shockwaves across the industry, dividing public opinion and intensifying media scrutiny. Dileep spent nearly three months in jail before securing bail in October 2017. From the outset, he maintained that he was being framed and repeatedly accused investigators of fabricating links between him and the assailants. The allegations of conspiracy became the most contentious aspect of the case and would go on to dominate the legal battle for years.

The trial formally began in January 2020, but progress was slow as the case faced numerous twists. More than 260 witnesses were examined and over 1,700 documents were submitted as part of the evidence. Several witnesses turned hostile, and disputes arose regarding the handling of digital evidence, including memory cards said to contain video footage of the assault. At different stages, the prosecution saw changes in legal teams, while petitions were filed seeking a change of judge, citing alleged bias. Despite the turbulence, the court continued hearing the case in a closed setting due to its sensitive nature.

The final arguments stretched across months, with the prosecution insisting that Dileep had a clear motive rooted in professional rivalry and personal grudges. They pointed to alleged conversations, testimonies of intermediaries, and claims that Suni attempted to contact Dileep while in custody, suggesting a connection. The defence, meanwhile, argued that the evidence was circumstantial and unreliable, asserting that witnesses had been pressured and that gaps in digital-evidence handling showed serious procedural lapses. They maintained that no material proof directly linked Dileep to the planning or execution of the crime.

On Monday, Judge Honey M Varghese accepted the defence’s position, ruling that the chain of evidence presented against Dileep did not meet the threshold required for conviction. The court noted inconsistencies in testimonies, lack of corroboration of key claims, and unanswered questions surrounding digital evidence. While these weaknesses helped Dileep secure an acquittal, the court held that the physical assault, abduction and filming were firmly established, leading to the conviction of six other accused. Their sentencing is scheduled for December 12.

Outside the court, emotional reactions unfolded. Supporters of the survivor expressed disappointment, arguing that the acquittal raised broader concerns about the difficulty of proving conspiracy in cases involving powerful individuals. Activists pointed out that the verdict, while punishing the direct perpetrators, leaves lingering questions over the alleged masterminding of the crime. On the other hand, Dileep’s supporters hailed the judgment as long-delayed vindication. The actor, speaking briefly to the media, said the decision restored his faith in the judiciary and claimed he had suffered years of humiliation over allegations he insisted were false.

The survivor has not yet issued a detailed statement, but those close to her say the ruling, while partly validating her ordeal by confirming the assault and convicting the assailants, reopens emotional wounds associated with the long legal battle. As Kerala absorbs the implications of the verdict, legal experts expect the case to remain part of public debate, both for its complexity and for the systemic lessons it highlights on evidence handling, witness protection and the challenges of prosecuting conspiracy in high-profile crimes.