|  |  | 

India Top Headlines

Goa Government Seeks New Trial in Tejpal Case; cites the observations of the court of first instance | India News


MUMBAI: The Goa government, in its appeal to the Bombay High Court against the acquittal of journalist Tarun Tejpal in a rape case, said it was a suitable case for retrial, citing the lack of understanding of the first court. instance on the post-traumatic behavior of the victim and the censorship of his character. .
The appeal, filed with the HC’s Goa court, was amended this week to record the ruling and include more grounds against Tejpal’s acquittal.
The government said that the court of first instance “considered the evidence given by the defense witnesses as an evangelical truth, but at the same time it discredited without finding the evidence given by the victim and the prosecution witnesses.”
He also claimed that the trial court completely ignored the strongest evidence in the case (the apology email) “which establishes the defendant’s guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt.”
On May 21, session judge Kshama Joshi acquitted Tejpal, the former editor-in-chief of Tehelka magazine, in the case in which he was accused of sexually assaulting his then-colleague in an elevator of a five-star hotel in Goa. in November 2013. when they were attending an event.
In its ruling, the trial court questioned the woman’s conduct, noting that she exhibited no “normative behavior”, such as trauma and shock, that a victim of sexual assault could plausibly display.
Subsequently, the Goan government filed an appeal against the acquittal.
In its amended appeal, which will be heard on June 2, the state government said the trial court had “lost sight of” the fact that it was Tejpal who was accused and being tried, and not the victim.
“The entire sentence is focused on charging the complainant rather than trying to determine the guilty role of the accused,” the appeal said.
The lower court’s finding on how a woman who has been a victim of sexual assault normally behaves is “untenable in law and tainted by prejudice and patriarchy,” he said.
In its appeal, the prosecution asked the HC to erase several parts of the sentence that slandered not only on the prosecution’s case, but also on the victim.
“This fact, accompanied by other attendant circumstances, clearly establishes a case for a new trial in accordance with the law,” the prosecution said.
Referring to parts of the ruling that noted that CCTV images and photographs of the event show the victim happy and smiling, the government in its appeal said that the observations “reveal a total lack of understanding of the post-traumatic behavior of the victims.”
They (first instance court observations) also demonstrate a total disregard for the law and also various directions and guidelines approved by the Supreme Court (on how to handle such cases), he said.
The trial court allowed the victim to be presented with “scandalous, irrelevant and humiliating questions,” he said.
“The trial court, in its 527-page ruling, has been influenced by strange and inadmissible testimony and materials, graphic details of the victim’s sexual history, which are prohibited by law, and has used them to censor his character and discredit his evidence. “the appeal read.
How the trial court recorded the accuser (victim) evidence in the case requires close “judicial scrutiny,” he said.
“Much of the contested trial has been consumed by sex gossip and alleged prosecution-related sexual fantasies that are legally prohibited,” the appeal said.
The victim in her statement to the police and court had said that while she was traumatized and shocked after the incident due to professional commitments, she had continued to work at the event, according to the appeal.
As for the trial court refused to accept the email of apology sent by Tejpal to the victim, the government said the court has not come up with any convincing conclusions on how a person of the defendant’s education, age, and maturity was in a position of power over the victim, she could somehow be pressured into apologizing.
“The trial court has completely ignored the strongest piece of evidence in the case (the email of apologies) that established the defendant’s guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt,” the appeal said.
Furthermore, she claimed that the trial court was wrong to question the conduct of the victims after the incident and that she entrusted the incident to three of her male colleagues rather than to her roommate.

Times of India