The Kerala High Court, on Thursday, July 9, reserved its verdict on the sentence suspension plea filed by Sunil NS alias Pulsar Suni, the prime accused convicted in the 2017 actor assault case, after hearing extensive arguments from the defence, the State and counsel representing the survivor.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan V and KV Jayakumar said it would first decide Suni’s application before taking up similar pleas filed by the other convicted persons.
The Bench orally observed, “We will pass orders in the first accused's. Others have asked for time. So we will post the matter after some time and after passing orders so far as the first accused is concerned, then we will hear other applications.”
Senior Advocate Sasthamangalam S Ajithkumar, appearing for Suni, argued that his client had already spent around 8.5 years in custody, including the period before he was granted bail in 2024 and the incarceration after conviction, amounting to a substantial portion of the 20-year sentence.
The defence further contended that the acquittal of actor Dileep, who had been arraigned as the eighth accused and was alleged to have conspired in commissioning the offence, had substantially weakened the prosecution's case. Counsel argued that since the prosecution had projected the incident as a quotation crime allegedly orchestrated by Dileep, his acquittal removed the alleged motive behind the offence.
The defence also submitted that the appeals arising from the Sessions Court judgment involve voluminous records, witness statements, exhibits and material objects, making an early disposal unlikely. It argued that suspension of sentence at the appellate stage would not prejudice the prosecution because the trial had concluded and there was no possibility of influencing witnesses. It was also submitted that Suni had not interfered with the prosecution case while on bail during the trial, apart from his alleged involvement in an unrelated dispute with a tea vendor.
Counsel urged the court not to be influenced by media attention surrounding the case or the status of the parties while considering the plea for suspension of sentence.
Opposing the plea, Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for the survivor, submitted that the case involved a continuing crime because the sexual assault had been recorded and copied onto memory cards.
Relying on judicial precedents, she argued that the considerations governing suspension of sentence after conviction are different from those applicable while granting bail before conviction, as “the presumption of innocence no longer attaches” after a conviction.
She submitted that the court must examine whether there were clear grounds to doubt the conviction, whether there existed a fair possibility of acquittal and whether any serious lacunae had been demonstrated.
She further argued that the conviction had followed a rigorous trial based on oral, documentary and electronic evidence and that Suni had not completed even half of the sentence imposed. She described the offence as one that had “shocked the conscience of the society.”
Special Public Prosecutor V Aja Kumar who appeared for the survivor also strongly opposed the plea, contending that Suni had violated bail conditions soon after being released by allegedly committing another offence and by publicly discussing the case despite restrictions imposed by the court.
On September 17, 2024, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court granted Suni bail, subject to what it described as "stringent terms and conditions". During the nearly 15 months he spent out of prison, Suni violated at least two of those conditions.
One of the conditions required that he not involve himself in any other criminal activity. However, within five months of his release, he was booked in a separate case under provisions relating to criminal intimidation, mischief and obscene acts.
The court had also expressly barred Suni from speaking to the media. Yet, within weeks of his release, he began meeting journalists, including reporters from The News Minute. In April 2025, Reporter TV aired a series of conversations with Suni, describing them as part of an undercover investigation. Suni also gave multiple interviews to The News Minute, in which he spoke at length about the crime and the events surrounding it.
In view of the bail condition prohibiting media interactions, The News Minute chose not to publish the interviews while the trial was underway. The interviews were published only after the trial court pronounced its verdict.
The prosecutor further submitted that the Sessions Court had awarded only the minimum sentence prescribed for the offences and that the State's appeal seeking enhancement of punishment and challenging the acquittal of the alleged conspirators required the sentence suspension plea to be viewed differently.
He also pointed to the statutory requirement for expeditious disposal of appeals involving gang rape offences and informed the court that the State was prepared to argue the appeals immediately.
The prosecution additionally argued that Suni's family had other earning members, disputed his claim of hardship and raised concerns over the possibility of his absconding. It also submitted that the investigation into the alleged copying of the memory card containing visuals of the crime was still pending.
The appeals before the High Court include challenges by the convicted persons against their conviction and sentence, as well as the State's appeal seeking enhancement of punishment and challenging the acquittal of actor Dileep and three other accused.
The High Court had, on June 22, called for the trial court records before considering the sentence suspension petitions. Earlier, the High Court had admitted both the convicts' appeals and the State's appeal seeking enhancement of punishment.
The Principal District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam, had in December 2025 convicted six accused, including Suni, and sentenced them to 20 years' imprisonment, while acquitting actor Dileep and three others of conspiracy charges after holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the alleged conspiracy.
The High Court is expected to pronounce its order on Suni's sentence suspension plea on a later date.
