Setting aside his acquittal by a Goa sessions court five years ago, the Goa bench of the Bombay High Court, on Thursday, sentenced Tehelka founder Tarun Tejpal to 10 years in prison for the rape of a junior colleague in Goa in 2013.
The court pronounced him guilty of the offences of rape and sexual harassment under Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k), along with Sections 354A and 354B of the IPC.
A bench of Justices Neela Gokhale and Amit Jamsandekar sentenced him to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and imposed on him a fine of ₹5 lakh for charges under Section 376 of the IPC, a year of rigorous imprisonment for charges under Section 354(A) of the IPC, and three years for charges under Section 354(B). The sentences will run concurrently.
"The court should consider the fact that there was no remorse and the offence was repeated despite a 'no' from the victim," the bench noted, adding, "The incident took place 13 years ago. There is no report of misconduct or allegation. Both parties must have moved on in life."
Tejpal, who was present in court, sought leniency, claiming that he was a "political victim" and the father of two daughters.
"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 told the court.
Tejpal's lawyer Aabad Ponda, while seeking the minimum punishment, also urged the court to suspend the sentence and conviction for at least 10 weeks so that they could file an appeal in the Supreme Court.
Tejpal later told reporters that he will move the apex court against the HC order.
"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.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, however, said Tejpal deserved the maximum punishment of life sentence considering his "brazen" attitude towards the victim and also for later portraying her as behaving normally after the alleged incident.
"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 said.
He repeated the offence the next day, and then during the trial and now before the HC questioned the victim's behaviour by saying that she behaved normally, he said.
"The punishment should be commensurate with 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.
