We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Proving conspiracy and common object in criminal cases is hard. It doesn't matter if Pulsar Suni says he did it - he can get discredited as an unreliable witness by Dileep's defence. The shortfalls in this case began and ended with the shoddy police investigation, which remains the bane and weak link in all criminal trials all over India.
The victim's legal team rushed to the High Court 4 years ago, claiming Honey was biased. The victim has been ill-advised, and frankly, the media gaze ended up jeopardising her case. An early lesson given to me by a clerk in litigation is this - the judge is your friend, the opposite party is not. Always argue from this basis. If you feel the judge is biased - prove it in an appeal, not declare during court.
This is the reason why American courts sometimes bar and regulate media reporting of court proceedings, and we have a sub-judice rule that is applicable from when a chargesheet is filed, which is constantly flouted. In the US, there is a genuine need as the criminal justice system is required to sequester the jury - here it's one person who is under enormous scrutiny and media gaze.
The reality is that Honey would have been heralded as someone sort of feminist icon if she had sent Dileep to jail and given some exemplary punishment. Mind you, it was the government that ensured that a female judge heard the matter, which itself is bordering on interfering with the course of justice. Honey stuck to the evidence put in front of her, and the HC can remand if it feels otherwise.
Just to be clear - Do I think Dileep is guilty? Yes. Has criminal conspiracy been proven beyond a reasonable doubt? Prosecution struggled, and many resigned, blaming the police, the judge, powerful people and the media. Why don't you look at the prosecutors? Court reporting in India is banal. Often paid, hysterical, reactionary and one-sided. Usually read the TNM, but they have messed up a lot lately.
Even after the acquittal, the CM openly extended support to the victim and said appeal is being examined.
Krishna Iyer was a communist minister.
He was still a damn fine judge.
Honey's reputation - go to her court and see.
Don't just go by what is written.
....
Now that the verdict is out, it is important to revisit the controversies around Judge Honey, including accusations of political bias and the long dispute in the actor assault case over her concealing a 2020 forensic report that showed that the memory card with the assault visuals had been illegally accessed.
...
Honey Varghese is the daughter of MM Varghese, the former Thrissur district secretary of the CPI(M). She began her career as a junior to Advocate KB Mohandas in Thrissur, practised in the district till 2012, after which she was appointed as a District and Sessions Judge through direct recruitment.
...
On December 1, 2022, Malayalam news channels aired a brief clip from a speech that Judge Honey delivered at an event organised by the Kerala Social Welfare Department. The judge is heard saying, “We have a notion that a prosecutor’s job is to secure convictions for all the accused. Conviction is not their responsibility – their responsibility is to society.”
The comment, on its own, was not extraordinary. But it made headlines, because until just a few months earlier Judge Honey had been facing allegations of acting against the prosecution in the Kerala actor assault case.
https://www.thenewsminute.com/kerala/the-judge-behind-dileeps-acquittal-who-is-honey-varghese
https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/judge-honey-varghese-dileep-case-actress-sexual-assault-qlo5anyi