Plea against Tejpal acquittal: ‘Judgment is an encyclopedia on conduct of sexual assault victim’

🗞️ Subscribe Now: Get Express Premium to access the best Election reporting and analysis 🗞️

After the in-camera trial, Additional Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi acquitted Tejpal of all charges on May 21, 2021.

Arguing that it was the victim who was on trial and not the accused, Mehta said, “The (trial court’s) judgment is an encyclopedia as to what should be the ideal conduct of a victim of sexual assault.” He said the judgment has stated, “how she should behave for being a successful litigant”.

Mehta told the court that the woman had been described by witnesses as intelligent and capable. “An intelligent woman, in public, who is attending to international guests, will not act like an illiterate woman from a village,” he said.

While acquitting Tejpal, the Additional Sessions judge held that the complainant’s behavior “did not demonstrate any kind of normative behavior” that a victim of sexual assault “might plausibly show”.

In its amended appeal, the Goa government had stated that the trial court, while acquitting Tejpal, had disbelieved the woman who accused him of the offence “on the basis of a conception of how a victim is expected to behave while being sexually assaulted”. This finding of the court, the state government had said, was “unsustainable in law and is coloured by prejudice and patriarchy”.

Tejpal has opposed the state government’s application seeking leave to appeal against his acquittal. His counsel Amit Desai had earlier argued that while filing the appeal, the Goa government had not followed the statutory procedure. He said the appeal was filed relying on the operative part of the judgment and before the full judgment was made available. He said that a senior, experienced, lady judge had been assigned to the case.

“A senior judge gave a judgment, examined evidence for six to seven years, the judgment is more than 500 pages and with the stroke of a pen they (Goa government) say the judge is wrong. This government has no respect for the independence of the judiciary,” he said, arguing that the state government had not applied its mind to the matter.

On Wednesday, both Mehta and Desai attended the hearing virtually from Delhi and Mumbai, respectively.

Mehta pointed out that the trial judge had named the woman in the judgment and they had to seek the High Court’s directions to redact the parts that revealed the woman’s identity in the judgment. “It is a criminal offence,” he said.

Meanwhile, Desai urged the court to allow Tejpal to renew his passport that has been with the trial court since 2018. He said his client wished to travel abroad on business for which he would make a separate application seeking the court’s permission. He, however, said at this stage, he only wanted to apply for renewal of his passport.

When Mehta said he would argue over the matter at the next hearing on April 19, Desai said, “It is a fundamental right to travel and I am seeking only renewal. The passport application will take about two weeks. I don’t understand the (state government’s) rationale…. just because it is a politically sensitive matter?”

Mehta then said, “The more vehement you become, the more suspicious we get.”

Justice Sonak, however, said prima facie, the court felt they can give Tejpal his passport back so he can start the application process for renewal. The court may, however, decide the issue next week.