Former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal convicted in 2013 sexual assault case by Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Thursday (Aug 6) convicted Tehelka founder Tarun Tejpal in the 2013 rape case, setting aside t the judgment of a Sessions Court in Mapusa which had acquitted Tehelka Magazine's editor-in-chief. The quantum of punishment will be pronounced at 2.30 pm. The case dates back to November 2013, when a Tehelka employee accused Tejpal of raping her in the elevator of a Goa resort during the magazine's annual Thinkfest event. A division bench of Justice Dr Neela Gokhale and Justice Amit Jamsandekar, which was hearing the appeal filed by the Goa Government, convicted Tejpal. The bench pronounced Tejpal guilty of the offences of rape and sexual harassment under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k), along with Sections 354A, 354B of the Indian Penal Code.

As the hearing began, the 62-year-old journalist urged the court for leniency, "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," he said.

However, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, opposed the plea for leniency, saying, "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."

Tarun Tejpal's acquittal

The Goa Sessions Court acquitted Tarun Tejpal on May 21, 2021 after which the Goa government moved the High Court seeking to overturn the verdict. During the hearing, Mehta argued that the trial court had erred by evaluating the complainant's conduct through preconceived notions of how a survivor of sexual assault should behave. He submitted that there is no uniform standard for a survivor's response, as reactions vary depending on factors such as personality, education, social background and individual circumstances.

Referring to emails sent by Tejpal to the complainant after the alleged incident, Mehta argued that the former editor had apologised for his "lapse of judgment", expressed remorse and acknowledged that he believed the encounter had been consensual. According to the prosecution, these emails amounted to an admission that an encounter had taken place.

The defence, senior Advocate Aabad Ponda, rejected that interpretation, arguing that the apology emails did not contain any admission of a physical or sexual encounter. Ponda maintained that the references were limited to a consensual verbal conversation of a sexual nature and had been misconstrued by the prosecution. The defence also challenged the complainant's credibility, contending that her conduct before and after the alleged incident, as well as emails, WhatsApp messages and other documentary evidence, contradicted the prosecution's version. It further argued that her account of being confined inside a moving elevator was inconsistent with expert evidence and CCTV footage.