New Delhi, Nov 6 The Supreme Court on Friday refused to suspend the 10-year sentence handed down to journalist Tarun Tejpal, convicted of raping a junior colleague inside a hotel elevator in 2013.
A bench of justices M M Sundresh and Prasanna B Varale observed that it was not inclined to suspend the sentence given by the Bombay High Court.
“We don’t find it to be a fit case to grant suspension of sentence,” the bench said while hearing Tejpal’s application seeking suspension of sentence.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Tejpal, referred to the evidence and other materials in the case and argued that the “whole story is false”.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Goa government, opposed Tejpal’s plea and said it is a case for enhancing the sentence.
On August 6, the Bombay High Court convicted Tejpal of rape and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, overturning the acquittal of the former editor of Tehelka magazine by the trial court five years ago.
He was convicted of raping the junior colleague during an event organised by the magazine in Goa. The 62-year-old journalist has claimed that he was a victim of political vendetta.
On August 25, the top court had directed Tejpal to surrender within three weeks to undergo his 10-year prison sentence and had dismissed his application seeking exemption from surrendering.
Subsequently, Tejpal surrendered before the trial court.
During the hearing on Friday, Sibal questioned the prosecution’s case and also the victim’s account about the incident.
He argued that as per the prosecution, the door of the elevator did not open for two minutes and nine seconds during the alleged incident.
Sibal said there was evidence to show that the elevator door opened twice at the ground floor during that period.
“The whole story is false,” he said.
Senior advocate Siddharth Agarwal, who also appeared for Tejpal, said there were six documented versions of the victim prior to the registration of FIR in the case and in none of them, there was any reference of rape.
Countering their submissions, Mehta said Tejpal was the owner of the magazine and the victim was an employee there.
“When this unfortunate incident happened in the lift, she (victim) thereafter rushed to her room where her other colleagues were there,” he said.
Mehta said there were statements of her colleagues that she was crying profusely.
“It is a case for enhancement of sentence,” the top law officer said.
Tejpal was convicted under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 376(2)(f) (rape committed 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).
Under Section 376(2)(f), the maximum punishment is life imprisonment.
On August 20, Tejpal moved the top court, challenging the high court order convicting him in the case.
The Goa government has also approached the apex court seeking an enhanced sentence for Tejpal, contending that the case warranted imprisonment for life.
In its petition filed in the apex court, the Goa government has contended that the sentence imposed by the high court was grossly disproportionate to the nature and gravity of the offences committed by Tejpal.
In its 81-page judgment, the high court had termed the trial court’s 2021 order “perverse”, noting that it fell for the notion that a sexual assault complainant must be a “perfect victim” and should conduct herself in a certain way to appear credible.
The high court also expressed strong disapproval of the way the defence put the victim in the dock and focused on her personal life, and said it found it surprising that the trial court “remained silent and allowed the defence to harass and humiliate her during the cross-examination”.
(PTI News)
