New Delhi: Hearing the appeal filed by the Goa government, the Goa bench of the Bombay high court on Thursday directed the sessions court which acquitted journalist Tarun Tejpal of rape charges to redact all references in its judgment which could disclose the victim’s identity before uploading it on the court’s website.
In a May 21 judgment passed by sessions judge Kshama Joshi, Tejpal was acquitted. The former editor-in-chief of Tehelka was accused of sexually assaulting his then colleague in the lift of a five-star hotel in Goa in 2013 while they were attending an event.
The sessions court, while acquitting Tejpal, questioned the victim’s conduct, holding that she did not exhibit any kind of “normative behaviour” such as trauma and shock which a victim of sexual assault might plausibly show.
Solicitor general of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Goa government, on Thursday told the high court that the observations made in the judgment and most of the findings with regard to the victim were “astonishing”.
“The judgment, which is yet to be uploaded on the court’s website and made public, also in various paragraphs discloses the identity of the victim woman. This is a criminal offence,” he said.
The judgment discloses names of the victim’s mother and husband and also the victim’s email ID, which indirectly reveals her (victim’s) name, Mehta said.
A vacation bench of Justice S.C. Gupte passed an order saying, “Considering the law against disclosure of identity of victims in such offences, it is in the interest of justice to have these references redacted.”
“The trial court is accordingly directed to redact the references made in the judgment that disclose the identity of the victim before uploading the judgment on the court’s website,” Justice Gupte said.
Mehta told the court it was sad that the HC has to order this (redaction).
“The trial court ought to have been sensitive towards these issues,” he said.
Criticising the observations and findings in the judgment, Mehta further mentioned that the sessions judge says a victim of sexual offences should display trauma and only then her testimony can be believed.
“The system expects sensitivity apart from judicial jurisprudence while dealing with such matters. We owe it to the (victims),” Mehta said.
He also questioned references made in the judgment to the victim’s meeting with senior advocate Indira Jaising and other women lawyers to discuss the case before recording of her statement with police.
“This girl, who is a victim of sexual abuse, had approached senior and reputed advocate Indira Jaising. The girl rightly took advice from a woman lawyer. What is wrong with that?” Mehta said.
He told the court that the government, considering the seriousness of the matter, filed its appeal even before it received a copy of the judgment.
“We received a copy of the judgment only on May 25. We would like to bring the judement on record and also amend the grounds of challenge in the petition,” Mehta said.
The court allowed the same and posted the appeal for further hearing on June 2.
Several lawyers and rights activists have expressed concern about the trial court’s emphasis that the woman’s behaviour did not exhibit signs or trauma.
(With PTI inputs)