Actress attack case: Dileep moves court for mirror images of digital devices

KOCHI: Dileep has moved the Additional Sessions Court in Kochi seeking mirror images of 32 electronic devices from which digital evidence was extracted by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) even as the prosecution sees it as the actor’s delaying tactics.

The petition in this regard had come up for hearing on Tuesday when the trial in the actress attack case was about to begin. Dileep's counsel argued that digital evidence collected from around 32 electronic devices seized from accused and witnesses considered as documents in the case were not handed over to them by the prosecution yet. Pointing out the Supreme Court directive in the case, the counsel claimed that they are entitled to receive these pieces of evidence under section 207 of CrPC.

These documents are vital in proving the innocence of Dileep in the case, the counsel said. He also claimed that they require mirror images of these devices including the report given by State Forensic Laboratory which extracted and examined these devices. This is to verify whether there is more evidence against Dileep in these digital devices. Only mirror images and cloned videos will ensure that SIT did not tamper with evidence.

Special Prosecutor A Sureshan, on the other hand, claimed that attempts of the actor was to delay the trial. According to him, there are obscene videos and pictures of other persons in these digital devices which will infringe the privacy of others who are not even aware of such contents. He submitted that prosecution will not rely on the documents asked by Dileep's counsel during the trial as it has no links with the case. The available evidence with the prosecution has been shared with the counsels of the accused persons.

Even the court asked the purpose behind getting the images and videos that have no connection with the case. Later, the court reserved its order in the petition on December 11.

Dileep's counsel filed another petition seeking two weeks’ time period to complete the examination of video footage of the victim with the help of an expert as directed by the Supreme Court. He said the expert had to be brought here from some other state for the purpose. Meanwhile, the court said that two weeks’ time period could not be given.