Daijiworld Media Network – Panaji
Panaji, Jul 31: The Bombay High Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on the Goa government's appeal challenging the acquittal of journalist and former Tehelka editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal in the 2013 sexual assault case.
A division bench comprising Justices Dr Neela Gokhale and Amit Jamsandekar reserved the order after hearing detailed arguments from both sides, primarily on whether Tejpal's apology email to the complainant constituted an admission of guilt. The court did not indicate when it would pronounce its judgment.
Appearing for the Goa government via video conference, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the trial court had committed a serious error by judging the complainant's conduct based on preconceived notions of how a survivor of sexual assault should behave.
He submitted that there is no universal standard for a victim's response, as reactions vary depending on an individual's personality, education, social background and circumstances.
Mehta argued that the complainant, an educated and independent journalist, continuing to perform her professional duties after the alleged assault could not be used to question her credibility.
Addressing alleged inconsistencies in her statements, the Solicitor General contended that minor variations in testimony are natural and do not undermine the credibility of a witness. He argued that the trial court had placed undue emphasis on insignificant discrepancies instead of examining whether the core allegations remained consistent.
According to Mehta, the complainant's complaint to her employer, messages exchanged after the alleged incident and other communications demonstrated that her account had remained materially consistent throughout.
Referring to an apology email sent by Tejpal following the alleged incident, Mehta said the accused had apologised for his "lapse of judgment", described the episode as "devastating", expressed shame and stated that he believed the encounter had been consensual.
These statements, Mehta argued, amounted to an admission that an encounter had taken place and were inconsistent with the defence's claim that no incident had occurred inside the hotel lift.
He further submitted that if no incident had occurred, there would have been no reason for repeated expressions of remorse, shame or references to lifelong punishment in the apology email. Mehta also highlighted Tejpal's statement that he would not dispute the complainant's account or minimise her anger and hurt, describing these as significant admissions.
Senior advocate Abad Ponda, appearing for Tejpal, rejected the prosecution's interpretation, arguing that the apology emails had been wrongly construed as admissions of a sexual encounter.
Referring to the testimony of prosecution witness Shoma Chaudhury, Ponda said her cross-examination clarified that Tejpal's "different version" related only to a consensual sexual conversation outside Block No. 7 on November 7, 2013.
He argued that the prosecution had incorrectly interpreted the phrase "fleeting consensual encounter" in the apology emails as an admission of physical intimacy.
Ponda maintained that none of Tejpal's emails admitted to any consensual physical or sexual act, but referred only to a consensual verbal conversation of a sexual nature.
He further argued that if the apology email had truly amounted to an admission of a sexual encounter, there would have been no need for the defence to challenge CCTV footage and other evidence relating to the alleged incidents inside the hotel lift.
Referring to the complainant's WhatsApp messages, Ponda also contended that her own response to the apology indicated that she did not treat it as an admission of sexual assault.
The case relates to allegations that Tejpal sexually assaulted a woman colleague inside a hotel elevator on November 7 and 8, 2013, during an event organised by Tehelka magazine in Goa.
A sessions court in Mapusa acquitted Tejpal of all charges in May 2021, following which the Goa government filed an appeal before the Bombay High Court.