'Shoddy probe led to Tejpal's acquittal'

Panaji Shoddy police investigation right from the word go and the failure of the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt led to the acquittal of former Tehelka editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal Additional District and Sessions judge North Goa Kshama Joshi said in her 500 page plus judgement.

The order, which was pronounced on May 21 has granted Tejpal "benefit of doubt" and acquitted him of all charges levelled against under sections 376 (rape), 341 (wrongful restraint), 342 (wrongful confinement) 354A (sexual harassment) and 354B (criminal assault), of the Indian Penal Code. A full copy of the judgement which was made available in the public domain on Wednesday has indicted the Crime Branch of the Goa Police for conducting a shoddy probe into the seven and a half year old case in which Tejpal was accused by a junior colleague of alleged rape in the elevator of Grand Hyatt, a five star resort in North Goa in November 2013.

A perusal of the lengthy judgement reveals that the Crime Branch may have erred in the first step of the investigation itself, by letting the complainant, in this case then police inspector Sunita Sawant - who filed the complaint on behalf of the state -- investigate the high-profile case. "PW 70 has admitted that she did not move any proposal before her superiors that she being the complainant the investigation should be handed over to some other officer, and claimed that her superiors directed her to investigate the offence. However, she admitted that her diaries do not reveal that she had any discussion with her superiors about the investigation being handed over to some other police officer, she being the complainant in the case,"the judgement states. "PW70 has stated that PI Sudiksha Naik was the only lady police inspector besides her who was attached to the Crime Branch at the time of the registration of the present offence. The above evidence of PW70 therefore clearly shows despite the availability of another lady police inspector of the Crime Branch, the investigating officer and her superiors malafidely retained the investigation with PW70 who was the complainant," it further says. Joshi's judgement also makes an indictment of the overall investigation by the police into key elements of the case.

"The investigation officer (IO) has committed omissions and commissions while conducting the investigation in the present case, wherein the IO has done no investigation on crucial and vital aspects of the present case," the judgement states.