The Kerala Police's crime branch on Friday, 21 January, accused Malayalam film actor Dileep of ‘conspiracy to murder,’ filing a report in this connection before the Aluva Judicial First Class Magistrate.
A criminal conspiracy case had been registered against Dileep after several audio clips came to light recently, in which the actor and one of his relatives allegedly appear to be conspiring to kill six police officials who have been investigating a separate 2017 case against him.
In the 2017 case, Dileep was accused of conspiring to get a woman actor raped. The prime accused in the 2017 case is Sunil Kumar alias 'Pulsar' Suni.
The new report confirms that the Kerala Police is now investigating the actor under Section 302 (murder) along with 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The police on Thursday, 20 January, had also filed a 68-page statement opposing the anticipatory bail plea filed by the actor in the Kerala High Court after he was booked in the new criminal conspiracy case.
Crime Branch: First Conspiracy in History of State To Harm Investigating Officers
In their response to the anticipatory bail plea, the crime branch said in its statement that for the first time in the state's history, there has been a “criminal conspiracy to harm even the life of investigating officers.”
"It is perhaps the first time after the enactment of the Penal Code that a quotation has been given to a criminal gang to commit a sexual offence including an offence under section 376 of IPC," the statement says, referring to the original 2017 case.
"Further, it is the first time in the history of the State that a person accused of a serious offence hatched a criminal conspiracy to harm the life of even the investigating officers," it then adds.
Dileep, termed by the police as the "kingpin of the crime," and his co-accused have moved the Kerala High Court for anticipatory bail in the new criminal conspiracy case, with his plea to be heard on Saturday.
"Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the involvement of the petitioners in serious offence, and that too to harm the life of the personnel of the law enforcing officers of the state, the petitioners are not entitled to invoke such extraordinary discretionary remedy of pre-arrest bail," the crime branch said in its response.
The Kerala Police alleged that Dileep had caused two special prosecutors to resign from the case and had influenced at least 20 witnesses, who have turned hostile in the case.
Special Public Prosecutor VK Anilkumar, who had been representing the survivor for a year, quit the case recently. And a year before, SPP A Suresan had resigned as well.
The crime branch argues that they need the option of custodial interrogation in the circumstances, and hence the accused should not be granted anticipatory bail.
“Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well-protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The custodial interrogation alone would yield results unlike a situation where petitioners are armed with an order of anticipatory bail.”Crime Branch Statement to Kerala High Court
Allegations Against Investigating Officer Baseless: Kerala Police
The new case against Dileep came about after filmmaker P Balachandrakumar went public in December 2021 with his claims that the accused actor had plotted attacks on the investigating officers.
It was Balachandrakumar who released audio clips in which a voice, allegedly that of Dileep's brother-in-law Suraj, can be heard talking about a conspiracy to murder the investigating officer and Deputy Superintendent Baiju Paulose. The conversation, allegedly between Suraj and Dileep, took place in November 2017 at Dileep's house in Aluva.
Balachandrakumar also alleged that Dileep's wife Kavya Madhavan and brother Anoop were reportedly aware of the crime.
The whistle-blower alleged that on 15 November 2017, Dileep, his family members, and a 'VIP guest' watched the video of the sexual assault on the actress at Dileep's residence.
This is crucial to the investigation as the revelation exposed the fact that Dileep was in possession of the video of the assault and that the audio was enhanced so that the conversation during the assault could be heard. He had also alleged that he had seen 'Pulsar' Suni, the accused number one at Dileep’s residence.
Balachandran recorded his statement at the crime branch’s office on 11 January 2021, and handed over 20 digital devices to support his claims.
"It is submitted that by its very nature a conspiracy is always hatched in secrecy and normally it is very difficult to obtain direct evidence. But this is a case wherein direct evidence of a person who has witnessed the conspiracy has come forward and given statement to the police regarding the commission of offence by the petitioners," the Kerala Police noted in their statement to the high court.
After the new revelations, the Kerala Police filed the second non-bailable case against Dileep, his brother P Sivakumar, and brother-in-law TN Suraj. The accused have argued that the new case has been maliciously filed against them by the investigating officer.
“The allegation that the 'FIR is the product of malicious and dishonest design of Bajju Paulose (Investigation Officer) in the case, who is scared that false allegations made by him in his final report and various manipulations carried out in implicating the petitioner' will be exposed are all baseless and without an iota of truth."Crime Branch Statement to Kerala High Court
Meanwhile, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday ordered the Kerala Police to investigate into the allegations by actor Dileep that the news channel Reporter TV and other media outlets violated a trial court order which had imposed a gag on media from reporting proceedings in the case.
In 2020, the trial court had said that the media should not report on the matter in any manner as it was not allowed by the Supreme Court's Nipun Malhotra judgment of 2018. In that case, the apex court had issued guidelines to ensure that the media while reporting on rape cases did not in any way reveal the identity of the victim, as already prohibited by law.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)