Did Tejpal’s apology email admit guilt? HC reserves verdict
The Bombay High Court on Thursday reserved its order on the Goa government’s appeal against the acquittal of journalist Tarun Tejpal in the 2013 sexual assault case.
A bench comprising Justices Dr Neela Gokhale and Amit Jamsandekar reserved its order after hearing arguments from both sides, which primarily centred on whether the former Tehelka editor’s “apology email” to the complainant amounted to an admission of guilt. The bench did not specify when it would pronounce its order.
Appearing for the Goa government via video conferencing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the trial court had committed a serious error by assessing the complainant’s conduct based on preconceived notions of how a victim of sexual assault should behave.
“There is no universal standard for a victim’s reaction, as responses vary depending on a person’s education, personality, social background, and circumstances,” Mehta submitted.
He argued that the complainant, an educated and independent journalist, could continue performing her professional responsibilities despite the alleged assault, and such conduct could not be used to question her credibility.
Addressing the alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s statements, Mehta contended that minor variations in testimony are natural and do not undermine a witness’s credibility. He argued that the trial court had wrongly relied on insignificant discrepancies instead of examining whether the core allegations remained consistent.
He further submitted that the complainant’s communications—including her complaint to her employer, messages exchanged after the incident, and other records—demonstrated that her version of events had remained materially consistent from the outset.
Referring extensively to an email Tejpal sent after the alleged incident, Mehta argued that the accused had apologised for his “lapse of judgment“, described the episode as “devastating”, expressed shame, and stated that he believed the encounter had been consensual.
According to Mehta, these statements amounted to an admission that an encounter had taken place and were inconsistent with the defence’s stand that no incident had occurred inside the hotel lift.
“If nothing had happened, there would have been no reason for repeated expressions of remorse, shame, or references to lifelong punishment in Tejpal’s apology email,” Mehta argued.
He also highlighted Tejpal’s statement that he would not dispute the complainant’s account or underplay her anger and hurt, contending that these amounted to significant admissions.
Senior Advocate Abad Ponda, appearing for Tejpal, countered by arguing that the prosecution had misinterpreted the apology emails as admissions of a sexual encounter.
Referring to the testimony and cross-examination of prosecution witness Shoma Chaudhury, Ponda submitted that although her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure referred to Tejpal having a “different version” of the incident, she clarified during cross-examination that, according to Tejpal, the only “sexual encounter” was a sexual conversation outside Block No. 7 on November 7, 2013.
Ponda argued that the prosecution was incorrectly treating the phrase “fleeting consensual encounter” in the apology emails as an admission of physical intimacy.
He maintained that none of Tejpal’s apology emails contained any admission of a consensual physical or sexual encounter, contending that they referred only to a consensual verbal conversation of a sexual nature and not to any physical act.
Ponda further argued that if the apology had truly amounted to an admission of a sexual encounter, there would have been no need for the defence to extensively challenge the CCTV footage, evidence relating to the alleged incidents inside the lift, and other factual aspects of the case.
Referring to the complainant’s WhatsApp messages, Ponda submitted that her own reaction to the apology indicated that she did not consider it an admission of sexual assault.
A former colleague accused Tejpal of sexually assaulting her inside a hotel elevator on November 7 and 8, 2013, during an event organised by Tehelka magazine in Goa.
A trial court in Mapusa, Goa, acquitted Tejpal of all charges in 2021, following which the Goa government filed the present appeal.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- HC reserves order on Goa Govt’s appeal against Tarun Tejpal’s acquittal in sexual assault case - July 30, 2026
- Chota Rajan gets 7 years’ imprisonment in passport forgery case - July 30, 2026
- SC slams CBI, Delhi Police EoW over silence in Indiabulls probe, calls their conduct ‘shocking’ - July 28, 2026
