In 2017, a popular Malayalam cine actress was abducted, raped and videotaped in a moving vehicle by several persons allegedly at the behest of Dileep in an attempt to take revenge on the actress who is believed to have played a role in Dileep’s divorce from his now ex-wife.
The said memory card contains the video recording of the assault and is a crucial piece of evidence in the ongoing trial in the 2017 case and has been marked as an exhibit before the Additional Sessions (CBI special No III) Court in Ernakulam where Dileep and his associates are undergoing trial.
During an examination of the memory card at a forensic science laboratory, it was supposedly noticed by experts that there was a change in the hash value of the card, which indicates that it had been accessed. At the time, the card had been in the custody of the trial court.
Though this change in the hash value was reported to the trial court in January 2020, it was not disclosed to the prosecution till February 2022.
The prosecution immediately requested another forensic examination of the card as part of the further investigation that was allowed by the High Court. However, the trial court dismissed the request, prompting the prosecution to approach the High Court by way of the instant plea.
The prosecution, led by Director General of Prosecution, Senior Advocate TA Shaji, argued that forensic examination to ascertain the impact of the change in hash value is absolutely essential so as to prevent the accused and their defense counsel from taking undue advantage of the same.
It was argued that the trial court’s refusal of another forensic examination is illegal and amounts to interference in the investigation which is in the sole realm of the investigating agency.
Source: Barandbench
