Porvorim

The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court on Thursday sentenced former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal to 10 years' jail in a sexual assault case filed by his junior colleague in 2013.

Earlier, the court convicted former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal in the 2013 sexual assault case filed by his junior colleague. The Bombay High Court's Goa bench delivered the verdict on the Goa government's appeal challenging Tejpal's acquittal by the Goa Sessions Court in 2021.

The case pertains to allegations made by a female journalist who accused Tejpal of sexually assaulting her inside a hotel elevator on November 7 and 8, 2013. Tejpal was arrested on November 30, 2013, on those charges.

On September 29, 2017, the court charged him under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including rape, sexual harassment, and wrongful confinement. However, he pleaded not guilty. Following the framing of charges, Tejpal moved the Supreme Court seeking to quash the charges levelled against him. The top court refused to quash the charges and directed that the trial be concluded within six months.

In May 2021, the Goa sessions court acquitted Tejpal of all charges, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The trial court noted the absence of medical evidence and relied on messages exchanged between the complainant and Tejpal, concluding that they did not support the claim that she had been traumatized by the alleged assault.

The Goa government subsequently challenged the acquittal before the Bombay High Court, seeking to set aside the trial court's judgment.

Speaking to reporters ahead of the quantum being announced by the High Court Tejpal said he would seek relief from the Supreme Court and alleged that he was a victim of political vendetta.

"We will go to the Supreme Court, hundred percent we will go. I have no doubt. For 13 years, because of a political vendetta due to Tehelka's work, they have been after me. We fought the case in the trial court for seven and a half years and were acquitted. Now they are after me again. They acquit those who are with them, but they go after those who have ever done journalism against them or said anything against them. You are journalists, go and see how many people they have framed in false cases in the last 12 years. They have framed me too, but I still got acquitted. Despite that, now it depends on journalists to go and ask questions. You know Umar Khalid has been in jail for 6 years. You know Sharjeel Imam is there, you know Surendra Gadling is in jail in different cases. Brother, it's not just them, there are dozens of people. I am one of them too. It is true that Tehelka did journalism and did some journalism that harmed vested interests, political interests. Because of that, with a sense of revenge, they have been after us for 13 years. They stopped my journalism, they closed Tehelka, they stopped the printing of my books. But we will fight, I have full faith that in such a big judiciary there are judges who will see the truth and the truth will come out clearly. It has come out once in the trial court, which ran my trial for a year and a half day on day because it was a day on day trial order. And there is so much material, if you people stop talking to me and go and see the evidence in court, there is so much evidence that I should be acquitted 10 times, not just once. We will bring that evidence before the public, no problem," he said.

Meanwhile, Senior Goa Police official and the former investigation officer in the alleged sexual assault case involving Tarun Tejpal, Sunita Sawant welcomed the Bombay High Court's order.

Sawant stated that the trial court had failed to properly appreciate the evidence and that the High Court rightly set aside the acquittal. Speaking to reporters outside the court, Sawant said the State had challenged the acquittal because it believed the trial court's order was "perverse".

READ MORE: Bisu Limbu of Assam studied under kerosene lamp to crack NEET

"We had already challenged the trial court's order because it was definitely a perverse order...Whatever emerged during the normal course of the investigation was presented before the court. At some point, the trial court lagged behind in appreciating the evidence. Everything was argued before the High Court, which examined the flaws in the trial court's order and accordingly set aside the acquittal," she said.