The Goa court recently acquitted former editor-in-chief of Tehelka magazine, Tarun Tejpal, in the 2013 rape case. Tejpal was accused of sexually assaulting his colleague in a lift of a five-star hotel in Goa. The judgment says that the survivor’s “non-rape victim-like behavior” led to the judges granting the benefit of the doubt to Tarun Tejpal.
The Goa government did not find the judgment acceptable and moved to the Bombay High court on May 25.
Some questionable judgments
Tarun Tejpal had sent a formal and an informal apology mail to the victim, clearly stating that he was unconditionally ashamed for the lapse of judgment on both occasions of November 7 and 8, 2013 that led him to attempt a sexual liaison. The judge refused to admit the formal apology mail by Tejpal, saying it was not sent voluntarily.
The court found no medical evidence to support the woman and that some facts led to the creation of doubt on her truthfulness.
Court held that the complainant “did not demonstrate any kind of normative behavior” that a victim of sexual assault “might plausibly show.”
It said that the woman’s messages to the accused “clearly establish” that she was neither “traumatized nor terrified” and this “completely belies” the prosecution’s case.
Remind me about the case again?
On November 23, 2013, the case began when an FIR was launched against Tejpal by a woman accusing him of sexual assault in a hotel elevator on November 7, 2013.
The Goa police arrested Tejpal on November 30. In February 2014, the Goa police submitted a 2846-page charge sheet that included statements of 152 witnesses and the formal apology email.
A six year long hearing
In January 2015, the police submitted the CCTV footage from the hotel and claimed that it authenticated the survivor’s claims of being assaulted twice. SC directed the proceedings to be completed within a year.
The proceedings continued till May 2021. Between 2015 and 2021, Tejpal pleaded with the High Court of Bombay in Goa against framing of charges, the victim was prosecuted by Tejpal’s lawyers, Tejpal moved SC to quash the FIR, and the Goa police examined ten more witnesses and submitted an additional charge sheet.
Remarks against the victim’s behavior
The judgment acquitting Tejpal by additional sessions Judge Kshama Joshi has raised eyes across the country. The decision found several faults with the investigation from the police and made debatable remarks saying the victim’s behavior didn’t indicate sexual assault.
The judge added that the survivor showed “improvement and material contradictions and had omissions and change of versions that did not inspire confidence.” The court found “glaring contradictions” in the statements made by the woman.
Criticism from the legal fraternity
The judgment has drawn a lot of criticism from the legal fraternity. According to comments made by different lawyers, the judgment has gone back to putting the victim’s conduct in the spotlight and that the decision shows how the court thinks there is a certain way you should look after a rape.
The judge agreed to only one of the critical points raised by the prosecution, that “the accused was a person in a position of trust or authority and a position of control or dominance over the prosecutrix.”
Lapses from the Goa Mapusa District and Sessions Court
The 570-page judgment which was made available two days after the verdict was announced, contained sensitive details regarding the victim’s identity, including the name of the victim's mother and husband. Even the email id of the victim was present in the judgment.
Two days after the 570-page judgment was made available, the vacation bench of Bombay HC has asked the Goa court to redact all the references made to the victim and her identity.
Supreme Court judgment ignored
Not only were there violations in regards to the victim’s identity, but the judgment also seems to ignore the recent 24-page ruling by the Supreme Court of India on March 18, 2021, on the dos and don’ts for judges while handling cases of sexual assault against women. Intending to remedy the ‘patriarchal mindset’ and ‘misogynistic attitudes’ in the judiciary, the court held that any reasoning/language that tends to trivialize the survivor should be avoided under all circumstances.
The Goa state government has challenged before the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court; the date for hearing the appeal hasn’t been assigned yet.
Like what you read? Share this article with your friends and follow us on:
Instagram| Medium| Facebook