Kerala govt., nun move appeal against acquittal of Bishop Franco

The Kerala government on Wednesday filed an appeal before the High Court challenging the verdict of the Kottayam Additional District and Sessions Court acquitting Bishop Franco Mulakkal, former head of the Latin Catholic diocese of Jalandhar, in a case relating to raping a nun. The survivor also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the Bishop.

In its appeal, the government argued that the evidence given by the survivor and corroborated by several witnesses and documentary evidence had proved that the then mother superior of St. Francis Mission Home, Kurivilangad, was subjected to unnatural offence against the order of nature and rape by Franco Mulakkal, who wielded power and control over the home.

The prosecution had in fact proved through documentary evidence the presence of the accused there on the days when the rape and sexual assault took place. However, without appreciating the evidence in the correct perspective, the trial court had misconstrued facts and the law and acquitted him of the charges of rape, the State said.

The appeal also said that the trial judge had appreciated the evidence presented by the prosecution with a predetermined mind to acquit the accused. In fact, every attempt had been made to discredit the victim by wrongly considering the evidence.

The State pointed out that the trial court ought to have considered the fact that the victim showed self-restraint in disclosing the real incident till she decided to start the legal battle, foreseeing the consequences that would have followed for the rest of her life. Therefore, the statements of the survivor could not be characterised as inconsistent and, thereby, label her as an unreliable witness. All prosecution witnesses had been discredited on flimsy grounds which did not stand the test of law.

The trial court also gave undue importance to the First Information Statement (FIS) which did not mention the intricate details of the crime. The victim had been discredited for the omission to mention penetrative sexual assault explicitly in the FIS. The court had found that the victim mentioned penile penetration only in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and this was viewed as an improvement in the version so as to affect her credibility.

The appeal also pointed out that the Single Judge ought to have considered that the victim chose to leave the congregation forever rather than fight with the Church or its superior authority or the bishop for ravishing her 13 times.