THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: After going through the detailed judgment running almost into 250 pages in the nun rape case, the prosecution is learnt to have zeroed in on the fact that the survivor has been discredited on minor differences in various statements which is not acceptable and the judgment has completely missed the context.
Based on at least seven points from the judgment, the prosecution has decided to go for an appeal, for which the final legal opinion is being awaited, said top police department sources. “The judgment seems to have given a colour of consent to the act which has not even been raised by the accused. Also, minor changes in deposition is a sign of credibility while it is the parrot-like version that has to be discarded. That is the principle adopted by the apex court. The court seems to have failed to appreciate this fact,” sources said.
After a detailed analysis of the verdict at top level in the police force, the general opinion is that all prosecution witnesses have been discredited as unbelievable on minor grounds and it is not acceptable. “For example, an explanation was given by PW2 (a nun and witness) to her superiors to avoid disciplinary action for cooperating with the investigation. In order to escape from being expelled from her congregation, she gave a reply in which she said that she gave the statement on pressure from police and she may be not proceeded against. This has been used to conclude that she is an unreliable witness. The circumstances in which she gave the letter was given no appreciation,” sources added.
The social background of the nun and the context which led to different expressions on her experience have also not been appreciated, it was felt.
“Consent has to be unequivocal verbal or non-verbal for the sexual act and it has to be proved by the accused. Travelling in a car or participating in a function is not consent by any remote chance. Rather it should have been seen as her ill fate,” sources said.
Investigation supervising officer and the then Kottayam SP Hari Sankar had come out openly against the verdict citing that the genuine explanations in respect of the delay and the aspect of fiduciary relationship with the accused and its repercussions on the mental condition of the survivor was not appreciated by the court.
Other officers who analyzed the verdict have also given the opinion that the court has accepted that the accused is the supreme authority over the survivor and has the powers to influence her life. Under such circumstances, the inability to resist or delay in reporting, etc, is quite natural.
“This should be seen in the context. The judgment has completely missed the context,” sources said.
The police top brass also expressed surprise that none of the rulings presented by the prosecution in its argument note found mention in the judgment.
