The Ernakulam District and Sessions Court on Monday acquitted Malayalam actor Dileep in the 2017 sexual assault case involving a well-known female actor, rejecting the survivor’s allegation that he had orchestrated the attack after a trial that spanned nearly eight years.
While Dileep and three others, Charlie Thomas, Sanilkumar (Mesthiri Sanil), and Sarath G. Nair, were acquitted, the first six accused were convicted of rape and related offences.
The convicted accused are N.S. Sunil alias ‘Pulsar Suni’, Martin Antony, B. Manikandan, V.P. Vijeesh, H. Salim alias Vadiwal Salim, and Pradeep.
They were found guilty under IPC Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 342 (wrongful confinement), 354 and 354B (use of force to outrage modesty), 366 (kidnapping), and 376D (gang rape). They were also convicted under Sections 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act for recording and transmitting explicit visuals without consent.
The court will pronounce their sentences on December 12.
Charlie Thomas had been accused of harbouring some of the offenders after the crime. Sanilkumar was accused of conspiring with Pulsar Suni in jail to extort money from Dileep. Sarath G. Nair was charged with handling and destroying the video footage of the assault. Three other accused, Vishnu, Vipinlal, and Aneesh, turned approvers during the trial.
The verdict attracted wide public attention, and the courtroom was packed with lawyers, journalists, and relatives of the accused. All accused were ordered to be present when the judgment was delivered.
Prominent film personalities were involved in the case, including both the survivor and Dileep. Several actors appeared as witnesses, but Bindu Panicker, Edavela Babu, and Bhama were declared hostile after retracting earlier statements made to the police.
One of the most striking developments during the trial of the Kerala actress assault case was the large-scale defection of witnesses. Several film personalities who had given crucial statements during the investigation later retracted them in court. In total, 28 witnesses changed their earlier versions, creating significant setbacks for the prosecution.
Their initial statements to the police had indicated clear hostility between actor Dileep and the survivor. Both had reportedly told investigators that Dileep publicly threatened the actress during rehearsals for a stage programme organised by the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA).
They had also stated that Dileep was angered by the survivor disclosing his relationship with actress Kavya Madhavan.
However, during the trial, Bhama and Siddique denied knowledge of these incidents and refused to confirm their earlier statements. At the prosecution’s request, both were declared hostile witnesses. Several others from the Malayalam film industry also withdrew or diluted their statements.
The detailed judgment will be available once uploaded by the court.
According to the prosecution, the survivor was abducted and sexually assaulted in a moving car on February 17, 2017. The first accused, Pulsar Suni, allegedly recorded the assault on his mobile phone. The prosecution claimed that the accused staged a fake accident near Athani, forced their way into the actor’s car, restrained her, and continued the assault until the vehicle reached Kalamassery.
Dileep was accused of conspiring with Pulsar Suni to humiliate the survivor. The prosecution alleged that he suggested filming nude visuals of the actor and offered ₹1.5 crore for the act.
Dileep spent 85 days in judicial custody following his arrest. After his arrest, the Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) removed him from its executive positions but quietly reinstated him in June the following year, sparking controversy.
In 2018, Dileep petitioned the High Court for a CBI investigation, alleging bias by the Kerala Police, but the plea was dismissed. His appeal was also rejected. In 2019, the High Court allowed the survivor’s request for the trial to be presided over by a woman judge. In 2020, she again approached the High Court seeking transfer of the trial, alleging bias.
In November 2019, the Supreme Court refused Dileep’s request for a copy of the memory card containing the assault video and ordered that the trial be completed expeditiously, preferably within six months. The Court later granted extensions for completing the trial. In August 2025, the Kerala High Court sought a status report on the long-pending trial after a journalist filed a petition.
Advocate Sandhya said she is not satisfied with the verdict and argued that if the judge was under pressure, she should have resigned. She said the judgment has affected the dignity of the victim and alleged that it is not based on evidence, describing it as subverted.
She stated that those who stand with the survivor believe the verdict is misguided.
Dileep, reacting to the judgment, said that it was a conspiracy against him and thanked those who supported him.
“It was only after Manju Warrier said there was a conspiracy that a conspiracy was created against me,” he said.
“Justice has been done finally, and we welcome the decision,” said BJP leader Tom Vadakkan.
Meanwhile, Kerala Cabinet Minister P. Rajeev said that the state government has decided to appeal against the trial court verdict.
He stated that he had discussed the matter with the Hon’ble Chief Minister and that the government stands firmly with the survivor.
