In a setback to Malayalam actor Dileep, the Kerala High Court on Tuesday dismissed his appeal challenging the order of a single bench on Friday directing the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to provide copies of statements of those examined during the fact-finding inquiry to the survivor in the actress assault case.

A division bench comprising Justice N Nagaresh and Justice PM Manoj dismissed the appeal filed by the actor observing that there is no reason to interfere with the single bench order.

During the hearing of the case, the counsel appearing for Dileep submitted that the survivor cannot file interim applications in a petition that attained finality since it was disposed of on 7 December 2023.

Relying upon the Supreme Court judgments, it was argued that the applications could not be filed in a case that was disposed of since there were no pending proceedings. It was stated that the order of the single bench judge was not maintainable since the judgment had attained finality.

Appearing for the survivor, advocate Gaurav Agarwal said that the fact-finding inquiry was conducted at the insistence of the survivor since her fundamental rights were violated due to alleged illegal access of the memory card. It was argued that the impugned order of the single bench judge was made in a writ petition under Article 226, and was thus maintainable. It was also submitted that the accused had no right to state that the survivor should not be provided with copies of statements of witnesses examined during an inquiry conducted at her insistence. It was also argued that the single bench judge would hear on the maintainability of the interim applications on 30 May 2024, and the present appeal was filed only to delay relief to the survivor.

The survivor, in the 2017 sexual assault case, filed a plea seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged leakage of visuals from a memory card, which was in court custody during the proceedings.

The survivor’s plea was heard and disposed of on 7 December 2023. The court directed the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to conduct a fact-finding inquiry on the allegations raised by the survivor pertaining to the unauthorised access and copy and transfer of the visuals from the memory card and pen drive relating to the incident while it was in court custody. The court also laid down the guidelines to be followed by the law enforcement agencies and courts while handling the sexually explicit materials to ensure that it was not leaked or transmitted.

The survivor was denied a copy of the inquiry report and was constrained to approach the court for the same. The High Court directed the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to provide a copy of the inquiry report to the survivor vide an order dated 21 February 2024.

Again, the victim filed two interim applications before the High Court seeking to set aside the inquiry report and to provide copies of statements of witnesses examined during the inquiry. The High Court directed the Ernakulam District and Sessions Judge to provide copies of statements of witnesses to the survivor vide an order dated 12 April 2024, which is challenged in the present appeal.