SLP FILED IN SC, EVIDENCE SUPPRESSED ABSOLVES TARUN TEJPAL CLAIMS DEFENCE

In a twist to the case where the Former Editor-in-Chief of Tehelka Magazine is facing charges of having sexually assaulted a junior colleague in 2013, the petition filed in the Apex Court is claimed to challenge Tejpal's very prosecution

Back in November 2013, a junior colleague of

journalist and then Editor-in-Chief of Tehelka

Magazine, Tarun Tejpal, alleged that he

sexually assaulted her in the elevator of the

Grand Hyatt Hotel, Goa, on two occasions

i.e. 7 November and 8 November, 2013, during the time

Tehelka Magazine was hosting its annual international

event, the THiNK Festival, in Goa. The allegations rocked

the nation even as Tejpal stepped down as Editor-in-

Chief of the magazine before being arrested in November

2013 on charges of rape and outraging the modesty of a

woman. He remained in police and judicial custody for six

months before being granted bail by the Supreme Court

in July 2014. In December 2017, the Bombay High Court, by its order dismissed Tejpal's plea for quashing of rape

and other charges against him. Tejpal has challenged the

Bombay High Court's order in the Supreme Court.

According to reliable sources, Tejpal's Special Leave

Petition (SLP) filed in the Supreme Court – the focus of

which is the CCTV footage and an independent witness's

version – brings to the fore disconcerting details

pertaining to the case. According to these sources, the

SLP obliterates all of the Prosecutrix's allegations, and

may prove each and every part of her statement given

on oath to the Ld. Magistrate as untrue. This in turn

may raise question marks about the practice of recording

statements before the Magistrate under Section 164 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

To reiterate, a case was registered against Tejpal on 22

November, 2013, claiming that he sexually assaulted a

junior colleague in an elevator of the Grand Hyatt Hotel,

Goa, on 7 November and 8 November, 2013, during the

Think Festival being hosted by Tehelka Magazine. However,

these sources who have seen the CCTV footage filed in the

Apex Court as part of the SLP say that it lays bare several

fallacies and incongruities in the Prosecutrix's statements,

and invalidates what the public has come to believe as the

facts of the case. It is learned that Tejpal has submitted

a chart along with the SLP to demonstrate how the

Prosecutrix lied to her colleagues, the Investigating Officer,

and the Magistrate.

The CCTV footage exhibits no signs of any untoward incident

having taken place, as against the Prosecutrix's claims that

Tejpal dragged and physically manhandled her on both

days of the alleged occurrence. Rather, at one point of the

November 8 footage, the Prosecutrix is seen running into

the elevator behind Tejpal around the same time she claims

that he dragged and physically manhandled her. According

to Tejpal's lawyers, the footage supports his version of the

facts and absolves him, showing the case against him to

be fabricated. They are accordingly demanding that Tejpal

be completely discharged on the basis of this footage and

other important details exposed by the SLP.

According to informed sources, back in November 2013

when the availability of CCTV footage in the case was

announced, Tejpal issued a press statement the very same

day demanding public release of the footage before he had

seen it.

Also according to them, the SLP stresses that the footage

covering both days of the alleged incident is actually

evidence produced by the Prosecution (Goa Police), and

puts a question mark on the entire investigation. The SLP

reveals that though the Goa police got the CCTV footage

from the Grand Hyatt Hotel, Goa, in November 2013 itself,

the same was released to the media, public and Tejpal's

lawyers only about a year-and-a-half later. It wasn't until

Tejpal's lawyers approached the SC, demanding that this

critical evidence be handed over to them that the footage

was actually provided to them. The SLP positions the CCTV

footage as the only primary and non-biased evidence in the

case.

There are other disconcerting facts as well like excluding

a couple of key witnesses; and lapses with regard to the

Prosecutrix's conduct which is quite the opposite of what

is claimed.

Staggeringly, the SLP bears proof of claim by the

Prosecutrix that she had a purported concurrent sexual

liaison with an iconic Hollywood actor present at the

festival as a Speaker. According to sources, the WhatsApp

messages in the Prosecutrix's own words sent to her

friends topple her claims of being in a state of shock and

anxiety during and after the days Tejpal allegedly sexually

assaulted her.

Moreover, the SLP questions aspects of the investigation

such as withholding proof and the fact that defence had

to wait for more than three years to get access to all the

evidence being used against Tejpal. The SLP draws attention

to the fact that even after petitioning the highest court of

the land, the defendant got only two of the three proofs

i.e. the CCTV footage and the Prosecutrix's phone data. The

contents of her laptop were not provided.

According to the sources, the SLP raises the question

whether the investigation into the Tejpal case was just

and uncorrupted, or was driven by vested interests where

important evidence was ignored by the Investigating Officer,

who incidentally is also the complainant in the case. The

sources disclose that the Prosecutrix never filed a criminal

complaint; it was filed by the Investigating Officer to herself

in her capacity as officer-in-charge of the police station, and

later assigned to herself for the investigation.

Disclaimer – The views expressed here are solely those of the author. The content in the article is

purely informative in nature.