Published Apr 24, 2026 | 1:46 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 24, 2026 | 1:46 PM
Judge Honey M Varghese
Synopsis: The judge had been handling the actress assault case since 2019, after the survivor specifically requested that a woman judge oversee the proceedings. Although judicial postings typically rotate every three years, she continued in the role beyond the standard tenure to ensure continuity in what became a complex and prolonged trial.
The survivor in the 2017 actress assault case has formally approached the President of India and the Chief Justice of India, urging them to halt the proposed elevation of Judge Honey M. Varghese as a High Court judge.
Justice Varghese, currently serving as Principal District and Sessions Judge in Alappuzha, previously presided over the high-profile trial in Ernakulam.
Her name was among five judicial officers recently recommended for elevation by the Kerala High Court Collegium, with seniority among district judges cited as a key criterion.
Also Read: Congress CM race narrows to Venugopal vs Satheesan in Kerala
The judge had been handling the actress assault case since 2019, after the survivor specifically requested that a woman judge oversee the proceedings.
Although judicial postings typically rotate every three years, she continued in the role beyond the standard tenure to ensure continuity in what became a complex and prolonged trial.
On 8 December, 2025, the court delivered its verdict, sentencing six accused—including the prime accused Pulsar Suni—to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. Four others, among them actor Dileep, who had been named as the eighth accused, were acquitted.
The survivor’s latest petition raises serious concerns about the conduct of the trial and specifically objects to Justice Varghese’s elevation while related matters remain under consideration.
The memorandum has also been submitted to the Union Home Minister, Law Minister, and the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court.
Central to the complaint are allegations that crucial evidence—specifically a memory card containing footage of the assault—was subjected to unauthorized examination while under judicial custody.
The petition suggests that individuals linked to the judicial process, including the presiding judge, were involved in this alleged irregularity.
The survivor has maintained that she has yet to receive full justice and has also expressed concern about the reported leakage of sensitive video evidence.
It’s also learnt that a unity formed to support the survivor will meet in Kozhikode on 27 April and will formally announce its decision to move against the judge.
This is not the first time concerns have been raised regarding the trial proceedings.
In January 2026, advocate T. B. Mini, who represented the survivor, filed a complaint with the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court.
She alleged that Justice Varghese made disparaging and unsubstantiated remarks about her in open court.
According to the complaint, the judge reportedly questioned the lawyer’s commitment, claiming she attended proceedings infrequently and behaved unprofessionally—remarks that were made in the presence of media and later reported publicly.
Advocate Mini argued that these statements were defamatory and intended to damage her professional credibility.
Also Read: KC Venugopal eyeing Kerala CM chair?
(With inputs from Dileep V Kumar)
