06 August,2026 03:39 PM IST | Panaji | mid-day online correspondent
The bench also imposed a fine of Rs 10.21 lakh on Tarun Tejpal, directing that the entire amount be paid to the survivor. FILE PIC
The Bombay High Court (HC) on Thursday convicted former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal of raping a colleague in 2013, setting aside his acquittal by a Goa sessions court in 2021, and sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment, news agency PTI reported.
A division bench of Justices Neela Gokhale and Amit Jamsandekar of court's Goa bench initially directed Tejpal to surrender within two weeks. However, following a request by his lawyers, the court extended the deadline to four weeks.
While awarding the minimum sentence prescribed under the law, the bench observed that the incident had taken place 13 years ago and that Tejpal had not committed any other offence since then.
"Both parties (victim and Tejpal) may have moved on in life now," the court observed.
The bench also imposed a fine of Rs 10.21 lakh on Tejpal, directing that the entire amount be paid to the survivor.
"The victim having suffered sexual assault would be handed over the entire fine amount," the court said.
During the sentencing hearing, Tejpal sought leniency, describing himself as a "political victim" and referring to his family circumstances. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Goa government, sought the maximum punishment, arguing that a strong message needed to be sent that "no means no".
"We set aside the trial court order of acquittal. The respondent (Tejpal) stands convicted," the bench said.
Tejpal later said he would challenge the HC's verdict before the Supreme Court.
He was convicted under Sections 376(2)(f) (rape by a person in a position of trust or authority), 354(a) (sexual harassment) and 354(b) (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe a woman) of the Indian Penal Code.
The court sentenced him to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 376(2)(f), one year under Section 354(a) and three years under Section 354(b). All the sentences will run concurrently.
Addressing the court, Tejpal pleaded for leniency.
"I am 62 years old today. I am a father of two daughters. I have a wife. I am a political victim. My lawyers have also asked me to urge the court to show leniency," he said.
His counsel, Aabad Ponda, urged the court to award the minimum sentence and sought suspension of both the sentence and conviction for at least 10 weeks to enable Tejpal to approach the Supreme Court.
Speaking to reporters later, Tejpal reiterated that he would challenge the verdict.
"We will be appealing against this order. We feel the order is wrong. We will be moving to the Supreme Court against the order," he said.
The case stems from allegations made by a former junior colleague, who accused the veteran journalist of sexually assaulting her inside a hotel elevator during the ThinkFest event in Goa in November 2013.
After a Goa sessions court acquitted Tejpal in 2021, the state government challenged the verdict before the Bombay HC.
Ponda argued that Tejpal had remained on bail throughout the trial and had complied with all the conditions imposed by the court.
"He has been on bail since trial and has not ever violated any of the conditions imposed on him. He is a senior citizen," Ponda said.
Opposing the plea for leniency, Solicitor General Mehta argued that Tejpal deserved the maximum punishment of life imprisonment, citing what he described as the convict's "brazen" attitude towards the survivor and his attempts to portray her conduct after the incident as normal.
"The convict (Tejpal) was in a position of dominance over the victim. The victim was not just a colleague but also a friend of his daughter. The convict has shown no remorse," Mehta submitted.
He argued that Tejpal repeated the offence the following day and later questioned the survivor's behaviour during the trial as well as before the HC.
"The punishment should commensurate the act. It is high time to send a clear message that no means no. That deterrent message needs to be sent out," Mehta said.
During the hearing on the Goa government's appeal against the acquittal, Mehta had argued that the sessions court committed a serious error by evaluating the complainant's conduct based on preconceived notions of how a survivor of sexual assault should behave.
There is no universal standard governing the reaction of a survivor, as responses vary depending on an individual's education, personality, social background and circumstances, the Solicitor General had argued.
(With PTI inputs)
