Ready to undergo polygraph test in abduction case: Dileep

Agencies

June 26, 2017

Thiruvanathapuram, Jun 26: Popular Malayalam actor Dileep on Monday said he was ready to undergo a polygraph test to prove his innocence with regard to his alleged involvement in the case of molestation of a top actress, in Kochi.

The actor’s response, posted on his official Facebook page, comes after recent revelations in the case that yet again placed him under the scanner over his alleged links with the key suspect in the case, Sunilkumar aka Pulsar Suni.

“Brain mapping, narco-analysis or polygraph test, I’m ready for anything. Not to make anyone else the accused, only to prove my innocence,” Dileep said. The actor, in a police complaint, said a prison-mate of Suni demanded Rs 1.5 crore from him to not name him in the case. Television channels have also released telephonic conversations between Suni and one of Dileep’s associates in which Suni is heard making similar demands. According to the police, the actress was molested in a moving car by Suni on the night of February 17.

Reports that Suni and his associates were hired to abduct and molest the 30-year-old actress had led to allegations on the involvement of Dileep who had a reported professional rift with the actress. “People involved in this campaign against me want my viewers to distance themselves from me,” Dileep said in his Facebook post. The actor said despite his innocence, he was being targeted by a group of people who wanted his upcoming film, Ramaleela, and subsequent releases to fail.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Pay the worker before his sweat dries’: Madras High Court cites Prophet Muhammad’s teaching while ordering settlement of dues

News Network

December 21,2025

Invoking the teachings of Prophet Muhammad—“pay the worker before his sweat dries”—the Madras High Court has directed a municipal corporation to settle long-pending legal dues owed to a former counsel. The court observed that this principle reflects basic fairness and applies equally to labour and service-related disputes.

Justice G. R. Swaminathan made the observation while hearing a petition filed by advocate P. Thirumalai, who claimed that the Madurai City Municipal Corporation failed to pay him legal fees amounting to ₹13.05 lakh. Earlier, the High Court had asked the corporation to consider his representation. However, a later order rejected a major portion of his claim, prompting the present petition.

The court allowed Thirumalai to approach the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) and submit a list of cases in which he had appeared. It also directed the corporation to settle the verified fee bills within two months, without interest. The court noted that the petitioner had waited nearly 18 years before challenging the non-payment and that the corporation could not be fully blamed, as the fee bills were not submitted properly.

‘A Matter of Embarrassment’

Justice Swaminathan described it as a “matter of embarrassment” that the State has nearly a dozen Additional Advocate Generals. He observed that appointing too many law officers often leads to unnecessary allocation of work and frequent adjournments, as government counsel claim that senior officers are engaged elsewhere.

He expressed hope that such practices would end at least in the Madurai Bench of the High Court and added that Additional Advocate Generals should “turn a new leaf” from 2026 onwards.

‘Scandalously High Amounts’

While stating that the court cannot examine the exact fees paid to senior counsel or law officers, Justice Swaminathan stressed that good governance requires public funds to be used prudently. He expressed concern over the “scandalously high amounts” paid by government and quasi-government bodies to a few favoured law officers.

In contrast, the court noted that Thirumalai’s total claim was “a pittance” considering the large number of cases he had handled.

Background

Thirumalai served as the standing counsel for the Madurai City Municipal Corporation for more than 14 years, from 1992 to 2006. During this period, he represented the corporation in about 818 cases before the Madurai District Courts.

As the former counsel was unable to hire a clerk to obtain certified copies of judgments in all 818 cases, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to collect the certified copies within two months. The court further ordered the corporation to bear the cost incurred by the DLSA and deduct that amount from the final settlement payable to the petitioner.

Comments