Kerala actor assault case verdict: Court acquitted Dileep, convicted Pulsar Suni and five others in the 2017 abduction and assault of a Malayalam actress. Read how the verdict, trial irregularities and political reactions have divided public opinion and what happens next.
In a verdict that has reignited debate across Kerala and India’s film fraternity, an Ernakulam sessions court on December 8, 2025 acquitted actor-producer Dileep (accused number 8) in the infamous 2017 abduction and assault case, while convicting six accused, including the prime accused Pulsar Suni.
The case, which shook the Malayalam film industry and sparked widespread conversations about power, gender and justice, has now reached a critical, and deeply polarising, moment after more than eight years of legal scrutiny, twists and public outcry.
What was the 2017 assault case
On February 17, 2017, a well-known Malayalam actress was allegedly abducted and sexually assaulted in a car while travelling to Kochi from Thrissur for work. The incident shocked the public and triggered an immediate police investigation.
Authorities soon alleged the crime was planned and orchestrated, not random, and emerged evidence suggesting the assault was executed with forethought. Sixteen people were ultimately named as accused, including the controversial inclusion of Dileep, one of Malayalam cinema’s most prominent stars.
What the court ruled on December 8
In the latest verdict delivered by Justice Honey Varghese, the court convicted six men, including Pulsar Suni, on charges of gang rape, abduction, criminal conspiracy and more. It acquitted four individuals, including Dileep (accused number 8), Charlie Thomas (accused 7), Sanil Kumar aka Mestri Sanil (accused 9), and Sarath Nair (accused 16), citing insufficient evidence to prove their involvement in planning or orchestrating the crime.
The court’s decision confirmed guilt for the direct perpetrators, but found
no legal basis to hold Dileep and the three others responsible for masterminding or facilitating the assault.
Controversy over legal process and trial conduct
The verdict has drawn intense scrutiny for more than just its outcome. Throughout the lengthy trial, critics alleged bias, pointing to decisions by Justice Honey Varghese that they say favoured certain defendants.
They also noted that the survivor’s legal team highlighted a report about illegal access to visual evidence of the assault, which the judge allegedly withheld for two years and did not formally include in the court record, a move that has fuelled allegations of procedural irregularities.
The calls to transfer the trial or revisit evidentiary handling were repeatedly raised during the hearings and were also highlighted.
These legal concerns have amplified public discourse about fairness, accountability and the treatment of survivors in high-profile cases involving influential individuals.
Political and government response
Hours after the verdict, the Kerala government expressed solidarity with the survivor. Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan reaffirmed the state’s support, stating,“We have stood by the survivor till now. We will continue to do that.”
The Chief Minister also noted that a detailed study of the judgement is underway, and that any decision on appeal or further legal action will follow a comprehensive legal review.
Public reaction is polarised
The court’s decision has sharply divided opinion. Supporters of Dileep see his acquittal as vindication, asserting that the prosecution failed to prove conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt. Critics and women’s rights advocates argue the verdict fails to reckon fully with the survivor’s experience, the alleged trial irregularities, and the professional and psychological impact she endured.
Why this case still matters
The 2017 assault case and its long, winding journey through the legal system have already reshaped the Malayalam film industry. It catalysed the formation of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), advocating for safer working conditions. It prompted the Justice Hema Committee to investigate harassment and gender discrimination in cinema workplaces. It also triggered ongoing debates about witness protection, media coverage, and judicial accountability in cases involving public figures.
Even as the legal chapter enters a new phase with possible appeals, the cultural and emotional aftermath continues to reverberate, making this one of the most consequential cases in recent Indian film history.
End of Article
