The Goa authorities in its attraction earlier than the Bombay Excessive Courtroom in opposition to journalist Tarun Tejpal’s acquittal in a rape case mentioned it was a match case for retrial, citing the trial courtroom’s lack of knowledge of a survivor’s post-trauma behaviour and censuring of her character.
The attraction, filed earlier than the Excessive Courtroom’s Goa bench, was amended this week to carry on report the judgement and to incorporate additional grounds in opposition to the acquittal of Tarun Tejpal.
The federal government mentioned the trial courtroom “thought-about the proof given by defence witnesses as gospel fact, however on the similar time discredited with none discovering the proof given by the sufferer and the prosecution witnesses”.
It additionally claimed that the trial courtroom fully ignored essentially the most telling piece of proof within the case (the apology e-mail) “which established the guilt of the accused past a shadow of a doubt”.
On Might 21, periods decide Kshama Joshi acquitted Tarun Tejpal, former editor-in-chief of the Tehelka journal, within the case the place he was accused of sexually assaulting his then girl colleague in a raise of a five-star resort in Goa in November 2013 after they have been attending an occasion.
The trial courtroom in its judgement questioned the girl’s conduct, noting she didn’t exhibit any type of “normative behaviour” corresponding to trauma and shock which an individual of sexual assault would possibly plausibly present.
The Goa authorities later filed an attraction in opposition to the acquittal.
In its amended attraction, which might be heard right this moment, the state authorities mentioned the trial courtroom had “misplaced sight” of the truth that it was Tarun Tejpal who was an accused and was on trial, and never the survivor.
“Your complete judgement focuses on indicting the complainant quite than making an attempt to determine the culpable position of the accused,” the attraction mentioned.
The discovering of the trial courtroom on how a lady usually behaves is “unsustainable in regulation and is colored by prejudice and patriarchy”, it mentioned.
In its attraction, the prosecution sought the Excessive Courtroom to expunge a number of parts of the judgement that solid aspersions not solely on the prosecution’s case but additionally on the survivor.
“This reality, accompanied by different attendant circumstances, clearly makes out a case for retrial in accordance with the regulation,” the prosecution mentioned.
Referring to parts within the judgement which famous that the CCTV footage and pictures from the occasion present the survivor cheerful and smiling, the federal government in its attraction mentioned the observations “betray a whole lack of knowledge of the post-trauma behaviour of victims”.
They (observations of trial courtroom) additionally show full ignorance of the regulation and likewise a number of instructions and tips handed by the Supreme Courtroom (on methods to deal with such circumstances), it mentioned.
The trial courtroom allowed “scandalous, irrelevant and humiliating questions” to be put earlier than the survivor, it mentioned.
“The trial courtroom in its 527-page judgement has been influenced by extraneous and inadmissible supplies and testimonies, graphic particulars of the sufferer’s sexual historical past, that’s prohibited by regulation, and has used the identical for functions of censuring her character and discrediting her proof,” the attraction mentioned.
The style through which the proof of the prosecutrix (survivor) was recorded within the case by the trial courtroom requires shut “judicial scrutiny”, it mentioned.
“A lot of the impugned judgement has been consumed by sexual gossip and alleged sexual fantasies associated to the prosecutrix that are legally prohibited,” the attraction mentioned.
The survivor in her assertion to police and to the courtroom had mentioned that whereas she was traumatised and shocked after the incident, attributable to skilled commitments she had continued working on the occasion, the attraction additional mentioned.
On the trial courtroom refusing to simply accept the apology e-mail despatched by Tarun Tejpal to the survivor, the federal government mentioned the courtroom has not given any cogent discovering as to how an individual of the schooling, age and maturity of the accused, who was able of energy over the survivor, might in any method be pressured into apologising.
“The trial courtroom has fully ignored essentially the most telling piece of proof within the case (the apology e-mail) which established the guilt of the accused past a shadow of a doubt,” the attraction mentioned.
It additional claimed the trial courtroom was mistaken in questioning the survivor conduct put up the incident and that she confided in three of her male colleagues in regards to the incident as a substitute of her feminine roommate.