[ad_1]
The Crime Department (CB) group investigating the case on the alleged conspiracy hatched by actor Dileep for endangering the law enforcement officials probing the actor assault case is but to determine the unidentified sixth accused within the case at the same time as a bit of the media is agog with speculations about his identification.
Issues reached a feverish pitch when an industrialist primarily based in Kottayam even met the media denying any hyperlinks to the case following rumours that the unidentified individual was a Kottayam-based industrialist.
Director Balachandrakumar, primarily based on whose revelations the CB had registered the case towards Dileep and 5 others, denied having recognized the unidentified accused. “Rumours that I’ve recognized the individual are baseless. Anyway having given an announcement earlier than the Justice of the Peace I’m not allowed to talk about the specifics of the case,” he mentioned.
For the reason that case was registered, the unidentified sixth accused had been largely considered ‘VIP.’ It was rumoured that Dileep had bought maintain of the visuals of the assault of the actor by means of him.
Regarded ‘VIP’
The case was registered on Balachandrakumar’s revelations {that a} conspiracy was hatched to hazard law enforcement officials, together with Dy.SP Baiju Paulose, the investigation officer of the actor assault case. He had even handed over an audio clip of the mentioned conspiracy.
The CB is prone to accumulate the audio samples of the accused, together with Dileep, to confirm whether or not they matched with voices on the clip. A raid was additionally performed final week at Dileep’s residence in Aluva to seek out the visuals of the actor assault case. Balachandrakumar has claimed that Dileep had the visuals and that he had even invited him to look at it.
Dileep’s petition
In the meantime, Dileep alleged that Mr. Paulose was in possession of the visuals and on Friday petitioned the Extra Particular Classes Court docket Ernakulam listening to the actor assault case looking for to direct the officer to submit them within the court docket. He mentioned the officer might misuse the visuals in the event that they proceed to stay in his possession.
[ad_2]
Source link
