PANAJI: The Goa government, at its amended program prior to the high court of Bombay in Goa, has sought a retrial of this rape case from Tehelka founder-editor Tarun Tejpal, claiming that the judge did not apply her brain when providing the judgment which amuses him.
The country has requested the court to permit the program and give leave to appeal.
The application was registered on Monday and will be very likely to produce hearing on Wednesday.
“The court disbelieved the edition of this prosecutrix (survivor) on based on a concept of the way in which a victim is predicted to act while being sexually attacked.
It’s respectfully submitted that this finding from the trial court is unsustainable in legislation, and is colored by bias and patriarchy,” the program said.
The program says that the extra sessions court failed to look at that a Supreme Court ruling (Aparna Bhat vs State of Madhya Pradesh), that held that judges should avoid commenting on the behavior of the prosecutrix in rape trials according to habits like smoking, drinking alcohol, smoking and even beyond sexual history, amongst other matters.
The program also claims the”apology” delivered from the accused to the herd following the episode, corroboration of spouses’ testimony from her coworkers that deposed as witnesses in court, and the a variety of text messages exchanged between the accused and the prosecutrix shortly after the events of alleged rape, weren’t contemplated by the trial court.
“The stated apologies sent only a day after the complaint was created from the prosecutrix were still an unequivocal admission of these events alleged by the prosecutrix, left with no inducement, threat or promise,” the application said, adding the apologies are admissions under Section 21 of the Indian Evidence Act.
It maintained that the trial court was entirely dismissed”the very telling bit of evidence in the case, which determines the guilt of the accused beyond a shadow of uncertainty”.
The state authorities also stated that the trial court had already cast aspersions about the investigating officer regarding the revelation of their DVRs on November 29, 2013, also has further implied that the investigating officer had ruined CCTV footage of the first ground of November 7, 2013.
“The trial court has dismissed the simple fact that the initial DVRs are deposited prior to the court and also have been forensically analyzed by CFSL, Hyderabad, initially in the request of the authorities, then, then, pursuant to the arrangement of the apex court,” the state said.
Referring to the ruling that cites”drunken banter” between the accused and the survivor, the program pointed out,”Just because the prosecutrix decided to stay silent about the ongoing efforts of those accused to make a defence for himself doesn’t cause the automated inference that the prosecutrix had approved his variation”.
The country said that the FIR wasn’t enrolled in the behest of their prosecutrix however from the condition of Goa, suo motu, upon being made conscious of the alleged rape in the elevator.
Thus, there wasn’t any event for its prosecutrix to get any substantive medical evaluation, and this truth cannot be held , the program stated.
“The trial court also has caused an adverse inference from the herd for not appearing satisfactorily traumatised or looking fearful after the 2 episodes and from the messages that she traded following the events,” the state said.