Tarun Tejpal rape case: Remove references to complainant's identity in judgment, Bombay HC slams Goa trial court

The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court on Thursday directed  a sessions court, which  acquitted journalist Tarun Tejpal in sexual assault case, to redact the references to the identity of the complainant and her family members from the judgment. According to reports, the single-judge Bench of Justice SC Gupte passed the order after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the judgment revealed the identity of the complainant by mentioning her email id and the names of her mother and husband. Mehta objected to comments on the complainant’s non-victim like behaviour in the trial court’s judgment. According to news agency PTI,  Mehta told the HC that the observations made in the judgement and most of the findings with regard to the prosecutrix were “astonishing”. “As per this judgement, any victim of sexual assault has to exhibit her trauma, and unless she does that her testimony cannot be believed,” LiveLaw quoted the SG as saying. The Solicitor General also took strong objection to the references made in the judgement to the woman’s meeting with senior advocate Indira Jaising and other women lawyers to discuss the case before recording her statement with the police.

“This girl, who is a victim of sexual abuse by person who is her father’s friend, approached an eminent counsel Indira Jaising, whose ability, competence and integrity cannot be questioned by anyone. She rightly took advice because you need to go to a lawyer whom you can trust. Unfortunately, for the first time in our Indian jurisprudence, the court records that there is every possibility of doctoring of events? How can counsel this eminence be a party to doctoring? I take offence,” the LiveLaw report quoted him as saying. Mehta was appearing for Goa along with Advocate General Devidas Pangam in the state government’s appeal challenging the 21 May judgment passed by sessions Judge Kshama Joshi acquitting Tejpal in the case. Mehta requested the court to keep the matter for next week, after which the court asked why it could not be heard in the normal course. To this, the SG replied that it is important for women to know that the High Court took immediate cognisance. “Normally I would have bowed down. But in this case, there is so much in the judgment.. It is important for women to know that the High Court took immediate cognisance,” Bar&Bench quotes him as saying. “In such matters, the systems expects sensitivity, apart from legal jurisprudence. Both of which are lacking in this case. We owe it to our girls, that this is taken up by the high court at the earliest,” he said, according to_LiveLaw._ Considering the seriousness of the matter, the Goa government filed its appeal even before it received a copy of the judgement, Mehta told the court. “We received a copy of the judgement only on 25 May. We would like to bring the judgement on record and also amend the grounds of challenge in the petition,” Mehta said. Justice SC Gupte in his order said, “Considering the law against disclosure of identity of victims in such offences, it is in the interest of justice to have these references redacted. The trial court is accordingly directed to redact the references made in the judgement that disclose the identity of the victim before uploading the judgement on the court’s website.” The court took on record Mehta’s request to put the order on record and also granted three-days’ time to the state government to amend the grounds of appeal against the acquittal order. The high court posted the appeal for further hearing on  2 June.

Tejpal, former editor-in-chief of Tehelka, was accused of sexually assaulting his then-colleague in the lift of a five-star hotel in Goa in 2013 while they were attending an event. Tejpal had faced the trial under sections 341 (wrongful restraint), 342 (wrongful confinement), 354 (assault or criminal force with intent to outrage modesty), 354-A (sexual harassment), 354-B (assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe), 376(2)(f) (person in a position of authority over women, committing rape) and 376(2)k) (rape by a person in a position of control) of the Indian Penal Code. The sessions court while acquitting Tejpal questioned the woman’s conduct, holding that she did not exhibit any kind of “normative behaviour” such as trauma and shock which a victim of sexual assault might plausibly show. Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi, in the 500-page judgment, said the evidence submitted by the prosecution and defence creates doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecutrix (victim) and noted that the benefit of doubt has to be given to the accused in the absence of corroborative evidence. The acquittal was challenged by the Goa government in the high court on Tuesday. With inputs from PTI