Supreme Court asks Tarun Tejpal: Why did you apologize if sexual assault charges are false?

The Hush Post | 8:48 pm | One-minute read |

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked founder-editor of Tehelka magazine Tarun Tejpal why he had apologized to his junior colleague if he claims the sexual assault charges against him were false.

Putting the senior journalist in the dock, the apex court asked why he sent the letter of apology to the woman after the alleged incident nearly six years back.

A three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra remarked, “If nothing had happened, you would not have sent apologies. Something inappropriate must have happened.”

Tarun Tejpal’s counsel had contended that allegations of rape against him were tailor-made. Appearing for Tejpal, Senior lawyer Vikas Singh referred to the CCTV footages of the hotel lobby. He submitted that Tejpal’s junior colleague was running after him and she had “started everything”.

Advocate Vikas Singh claimed that anybody can make allegations like this in a lift. He further accused the police of concealing certain WhatsApp messages of the victim, which according to Singh, will prove the charges false.

TEJPAL ACCUSED OF SEXUALLY ASSAULTING JUNIOR

A junior colleague of Tejpal had accused him of sexually assaulting her inside a lift at a five-star hotel in Goa during an event in 2013. He is currently out on bail. The episode had triggered massive outrage.

Tarun Tejpal has moved the Supreme Court seeking charges of rape and wrongful confinement against him quashed. Earlier, a Goa court had ordered him to stand the trial.

Meanwhile, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appeared for the Goa Police and refuted these allegations and said that the arguments by Tejpal’s lawyer were meant for the trial. “The trial is yet to take place. There are ample materials in the form of contemporaneous emails,” said Mehta.

Asking Vikas Singh to reserve the arguments on the merit of the case for the trial, the bench said, “It is not at this stage. It (complaint) cannot be dismissed at this stage.”

It then reserved its order on Tejpal’s petition while adding: “We will not damage anybody’s case.”

Leave a Reply