The Special Court trying the actor rape case sought fresh evidence from the prosecution to substantiate its plea to cancel the bail granted to actor Dileep, the eighth accused in the case.
Though the court had earlier dismissed a plea for cancelling the bail for want of evidence, the prosecution had not challenged the order. The same set of allegations and evidence that were considered by the court in the earlier petition was produced in the new plea. There was nothing on record to prove a change of circumstance in the case and the emergence of new evidence warranting the cancellation of the bail, the court noted.
On the reported extraction of sound clips from the mobile phones of the accused, the court noted that the prosecution had failed to produce the scientific reports from the Forensic Science Laboratory to prove that the sound clips were that of the accused. The court cannot decide on the case based on partial or incomplete evidence, the court pointed out.
The court also asked the prosecution to abstain from maligning it.
Enraged by the prosecution contention that some court documents were leaked and the court staff needed to be interrogated regarding the recovery of documents from the mobile phone of Dileep, the judge sought an explanation from the prosecution on the steps taken to question the court staff.
The judge noted that it had become clear that no secret documents were leaked from the court and all the documents were secure in its custody. All that was found in the phone of the accused was the certified copies of an earlier court order. Though the prosecution had been raising a bogey of allegations regarding the leaked documents, it had not taken any steps to interrogate the court staff. The court itself had issued an order that no permission was required to interrogate its staff. The court cannot be made to stand under a cloud of suspicion, the judge pointed out.
The court also sought an explanation from the prosecution whether it had booked any cases against the lawyers of Dileep after the Assistant Public Prosecutor raised the allegation that the lawyers had destroyed the evidence from the mobile phone of the actor. The destruction of evidence is a serious offence and hence the police shall book a case against the lawyers for committing the offence, the court suggested.
The court posted the case for May 19.
