22.2 C
Dehradun, IN
August 16, 2026
https://theheadlinepost.com/
CrimeDehradunNew DelhiUttarakhand

Tehelka Founder Tarun Tejpal Sentenced to 10 Years in 2013 Rape Case by Bombay High Court

REPORT BY SWATI

NEW DELHI, Aug. 7

In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court has convicted former Tehelka editor-in-chief Tarun Tejpal in the 2013 Goa rape case and sentenced him to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment, overturning his 2021 acquittal by the trial court.

The High Court held Tejpal guilty of sexually assaulting a junior colleague during the ThinkFest event held at a luxury resort in Goa in November 2013. The court also directed him to surrender before the Goa Police within four weeks.

According to the judgment, Tejpal has been convicted under provisions of the Indian Penal Code dealing with rape by a person in a position of authority, sexual harassment, and assault with intent to disrobe a woman. The court imposed a 10-year prison sentence and a fine, while a detailed copy of the judgment is awaited.

The verdict reverses the decision of a Goa trial court, which had acquitted Tejpal in May 2021, citing insufficient evidence and granting him the benefit of doubt. The Bombay High Court, however, found sufficient grounds to set aside that acquittal after hearing the state’s appeal.

Soon after the verdict, Tejpal approached the Supreme Court seeking interim relief. His counsel requested that the High Court suspend the conviction order for a limited period to allow him to challenge the judgment before the apex court.

Addressing the court before sentencing, Tejpal reportedly sought leniency, citing his age and personal circumstances. The High Court, however, proceeded with the sentence after considering the submissions of both sides.

The case has remained one of India’s most closely watched criminal trials involving a senior media personality. The complainant had accused Tejpal of sexually assaulting her inside an elevator during the Tehelka ThinkFest event in Goa in 2013, allegations that he had consistently denied.

The latest judgment marks a major development in the long-running case, which has spanned nearly 13 years and is expected to see further legal proceedings before the Supreme Court.

Related posts

Mamata Banerjee’s Convoy Faces Protest in North 24 Parganas; Mud, Bottles and Shoes Thrown Kolkata: West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s convoy came under protest in North 24 Parganas, where demonstrators raised slogans against the Trinamool Congress (TMC) chief and allegedly threw mud, bottles and shoes towards her vehicle. The incident triggered tension in the area as protesters gathered along the route of the Chief Minister’s convoy and shouted slogans against Mamata Banerjee. According to reports, similar scenes were witnessed in Purulia, where mud, bottles and footwear were reportedly thrown at the Chief Minister’s vehicle amid protests. Security personnel accompanying the convoy moved swiftly to control the situation and ensure the Chief Minister’s safe passage. The incidents have raised fresh concerns over security arrangements surrounding the West Bengal Chief Minister, particularly during public movements and political programmes. Further details regarding the identities of the protesters and the circumstances leading to the demonstrations are awaited.

The Headline Post

Supreme Court Issues Ultimatum to Centre Over Front-of-Pack Food Warning Labels Category: National | Health | Supreme Court | Food Safety By Swati | The International Desk | The Headline Post New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued a stern ultimatum to the Centre over the implementation of front-of-pack warning labels on packaged food products containing excessive levels of sugar, salt and saturated fat, questioning the government’s approach to a measure aimed at protecting public health. A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran expressed strong displeasure over the stance adopted by the Centre and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). The court questioned whether regulatory authorities were being influenced by corporate interests while framing food-labelling policies. The matter arose during a Public Interest Litigation concerning mandatory warning labels on packaged food. The petitioner argued that consumers, particularly children, need clear and prominent information about the nutritional risks associated with products high in added sugar, salt and saturated fats. The Bench also scrutinised the FSSAI’s position, observing that its submissions appeared to emphasise opposition from the food industry while allegedly failing to adequately acknowledge evidence supporting warning labels as a tool to discourage excessive consumption of unhealthy ingredients. The court referred to minutes of an FSSAI meeting held on March 7 and noted an apparent contradiction between the regulator’s position and its earlier directives. During the hearing, the Bench questioned Additional Solicitor General Brijender Chahar, representing the Centre, over whether the government was reluctant to take necessary action despite the court’s earlier directions. The controversy highlights the larger policy battle between public-health advocates seeking stronger nutritional safeguards and sections of the food industry opposing stringent front-of-pack warning requirements. The Supreme Court’s intervention has placed renewed focus on the need for transparent food labelling, particularly as lifestyle-related health risks associated with excessive consumption of sugar, salt and saturated fats continue to attract public-health concern. Key Takeaway: The Supreme Court has made it clear that food-labelling policy cannot be shaped merely by commercial considerations and has pressed the Centre and FSSAI for effective action on front-of-pack warning labels.

The Headline Post

Heavy Rain Disrupts Rail Services on Lalkuan–Kashipur Route; Track Submerged, Train Cancelled

The Headline Post

Leave a Comment