Bombay High Court Convicts Tarun Tejpal in 2013 Rape Case, Overturns Acquittal

Panaji, Goa – The Bombay High Court’s Goa Bench on Thursday, August 6, delivered a significant verdict, convicting former Tehelka magazine editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal in a 2013 sexual assault case. The court overturned a previous judgment by a Sessions Court in Mapusa that had acquitted Tejpal of all charges.

A division bench comprising Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale and Justice Amit Jamsandekar found Tejpal guilty of rape and sexual harassment. The conviction was made under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k), along with Sections 354A and 354B of the Indian Penal Code, following an appeal filed by the Goa Government. The court’s decision marks a major reversal in a high-profile case that has garnered national attention since its inception.

Following the pronouncement of the verdict, the court adjourned the matter for a separate hearing on the quantum of sentence. Tejpal, who was present in the courtroom as directed by the bench, appeared to plead for leniency. His senior counsel, Aabad Ponda, requested the bench to consider the fact that the alleged incident occurred over a decade ago. Ponda also highlighted that Tejpal had no other criminal record and sought an eight-week stay on the conviction order to allow time for an appeal to be filed in the Supreme Court, given that this was a reversal of an earlier acquittal.

Addressing the bench directly, the 62-year-old Tejpal stated, “I am 62, and I believe I am a victim. I have a wife, and that’s not much else to say. All that I can say is we can go and appeal. Please be lenient with me. The rest of the facts are placed on record.”

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the State, vehemently opposed the plea for leniency. He argued that Tejpal had committed the offence against a junior colleague who was “a girl of his daughter’s age” and in a position of trust, where he was a “father figure.” Mehta emphasized the need for a strong precedent, stating, “Despite the victim being a girl of his daughter’s age, he committed an offence… He was a father figure should have not indulged into this… A precedent must be set… Victim refused but he kept advancing on two subsequent days… This court must give out a clear message to the society that when a girl says no, it means no. A No Means A No.” The court is scheduled to hear arguments on the sentence later today.

The case dates back to November 2013, when a junior colleague accused Tejpal of sexually assaulting her during an official event in Goa. The allegations first surfaced when the woman complained to Tehelka’s then-managing editor, Shoma Chaudhry. The following day, Tejpal sent a lengthy email to the victim, offering an unconditional apology for what he described as a “shameful lapse of judgment” and an “attempt to a sexual liaison” despite her “clear reluctance.” He also communicated a similar sentiment to Chaudhry, acknowledging an “awful misreading of the situation.”

The victim, however, insisted on an internal inquiry under the Vishakha guidelines. Tejpal subsequently stepped down from his editorial role for six months. The Goa Police took suo motu cognizance of the widely reported allegations on November 22, 2013, and registered a complaint. Tejpal was arrested on November 30, 2013, after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected. He was later granted regular bail by the Supreme Court in July 2014.

In February 2014, the Goa Police Crime Branch filed a comprehensive 2,846-page charge sheet against him. The trial proceeded in-camera, a measure allowed by the Sessions Court in June 2017 to protect the privacy and dignity of both parties. Charges were framed in September 2017, and the victim testified in March 2018. The prosecution presented 71 witnesses, while the defence cross-examined five. Key evidence included the victim’s statement, testimonies from colleagues, and electronic evidence such as CCTV footage, emails, and WhatsApp messages.

In August 2019, the Supreme Court had rejected Tejpal’s plea to quash the charges against him, describing the alleged offence as “morally abhorrent” and an “assault on the privacy of the victim.” The apex court had then directed the Sessions Court to conclude the trial within six months.

On May 21, 2021, Special Judge Kshama Joshi of the Mapusa Court acquitted Tejpal of all charges. The Sessions Court had observed that there was “no corroborative evidence” to support the allegations and that the victim’s deposition showed “improvement, material contradictions, omissions and change of versions, which does not inspire confidence,” thereby granting Tejpal the benefit of doubt.

The State CID, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Goa’s Advocate General Devidas Pangam, subsequently appealed this acquittal. They argued that the Sessions Court had erred by focusing on the victim’s ‘post-incident’ behaviour and background rather than the material evidence, effectively “putting the victim on trial.” The State contended that crucial evidence, such as Tejpal’s apology email, had been overlooked. Tejpal’s counsel, Aabad Ponda, had countered during the appeal, asserting that the trial court’s judgment was “well-reasoned” and based on “objective electronic evidence,” not “stereotypical notions.”

The detailed copy of the Bombay High Court’s judgment is yet to be made public.