Kerala Actor Sexual Assault Case: Supreme Court Grants Bail To Accused Martin Antony

In another development in the 2017 sexual assault case in which Actor Dileep is an accused, Supreme Court on Wednesday granted bail to the co accused driver Martin Antony who has been behind bars for almost 5 years.

A Bench comprising  Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Abhay S Oka granted bail taking note of the fact that the petitioner has crossed more than five years of incarceration and all other accused persons have been released on post-arrest bail. 

The Court has directed that the petitioner be produced before the concerned trial court within a period of three days and be released on such terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court. The trial court will however be at liberty to impose such conditions to ensure his presence in the pending trial.

The Court was informed that the trial is being monitored to be speed up and to be completed within the time framework given by the top Court, but for all practical purposes could not be concluded

The Bench issued the direction in a special leave petition filed challenging the Kerala High Court's order refusing to grant bail to Antony. The Bail application rejected by the High Court was the 13th regular bail application filed by the petitioner in this case.

The petition filed through Advocate Alex Joseph has stated that the Petitioner is a driver who was occasionally hired by Dileep's company when the members of their drivers union are not available.

According to the petitioner, he happened to be driving the survivor actress from her home to the shooting location on the day of the incident as engaged by Dileep's company. However on the way, another vehicle hit them from behind and the passengers of that vehicle caught hold of the petitioner later and manhandled him.

It is the petitioner's case that he was taken to the other vehicle and that during the commission of the offence, individuals from the other car were driving the survivor's vehicle.

However when the incident came to light, the petitioner was also arrayed as an accused in the sexual assault case, under the presumption that he was the one who drove the survivor's vehicle when the offence was committed.

The present petitioner has been accused of committing offences under Secs.120B, 201, 212, 342, 366, 376(D) & 506(i) read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 66E & 67A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008.

While dismissing his application for regular bail, the High Court had taken the view that if the petitioner wanted to to raise contentions regarding the evidentiary aspects, etc, the same should be done before the Sessions Court. Therefore, the Court desisted from entering into the evidentiary aspects at this stage and had granted liberty to the petitioner to raise such contentions before the Sessions Court by filing application under Sec.439 of the Cr.P.C.

However , according to the petitioner, the High Court, without even looking into the evidence of relevant witnesses including that of the victim showing the innocence of the petitioner observed that 'the allegation against the petitioner is very serious and grave' in nature and dismissed his bail application.

In 2017, a popular actress was allegedly abducted and raped in a moving vehicle pursuant to a conspiracy, allegedly plotted by Dileep. Being the 8th accused in the case, he is now undergoing trial before the CBI Special Judge.

The case made headlines once again in 2022 when film director Balachandrakumar made shocking disclosures against the actor bringing out new allegations against him.

The Kerala High Court in March 2022 dismissed the plea moved by actor Dileep seeking to suspend further investigation into the 2017 sexual assault case.

Dileep had accused the case to be a 'deliberate and calculated attempt' of the prosecution to sabotage the trial before the Special CBI Court. He has further pointed out that the impugned report containing new information was submitted by the Investigating Officer on 29th December 2021, the exact date when the Officer was scheduled to be examined as the last witness for the prosecution at the trial court.

The accused has also contended that this report is unsustainable for the mere reason that it goes against the clear judicial pronouncements of the Supreme Court against investigating further if the charges are framed without obtaining formal permission of the Court.

Click Here To Read/Download Order