Tejpal case: Bombay excessive court docket asks periods court docket to redact references to sufferer’s identification in judgment

The Goa bench of the Bombay High Court on Thursday directed a periods court docket, which just lately acquitted journalist Tarun Tejpal in a 2013 rape case, to redact all references in its judgement which disclose the sufferer’s identification, earlier than importing it on the court docket’s web site.
A trip bench of Justice S C Gupte was listening to an attraction filed by the Goa authorities, difficult the May 21 judgement handed by periods choose Kshama Joshi acquitting Tejpal within the case.
Tejpal, former editor-in-chief of Tehelka, was accused of sexually assaulting his then colleague within the carry of a five-star lodge in Goa in 2013 whereas they have been attending an occasion.
The periods court docket whereas acquitting Tejpal questioned the sufferer’s conduct, holding that she didn’t exhibit any form of “normative behaviour” similar to trauma and shock which a sufferer of sexual assault would possibly plausibly present.

Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, showing for the Goa authorities, on Thursday advised the HC that the observations made within the judgement and a lot of the findings with regard to the sufferer have been “astonishing”.
“The judgement, 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 mentioned.
The judgement discloses names of the sufferer’s mom and husband and in addition the sufferer’s e-mail ID which not directly reveals her (sufferer) title, Mehta mentioned.
Justice S C Gupte mentioned he would handle this and handed 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 judgement that disclose the identity of the victim before uploading the judgement on the court’s website,” Justice Gupte mentioned.

Mehta advised the court docket it was unhappy that the HC has to order this (redaction). “The trial court ought to have been sensitive towards these issues,” he mentioned.
Criticising the observations and findings within the judgement, Mehta additional talked about that the periods choose says a sufferer of sexual offences ought to show trauma and solely then her testimony could be believed.
“The system expects sensitivity apart from judicial jurisprudence while dealing with such matters. We owe it to the girls (victims),” Mehta mentioned.
He additionally questioned references made within the judgement to the sufferer’s assembly with senior advocate Indira Jaisingh and different girls legal professionals to debate the case earlier than recording of her assertion with police.
“This girl, who is a victim of sexual abuse, had approached senior and reputed advocate Indira Jaisingh. The girl rightly took advice from a woman lawyer. What is wrong with that?” Mehta mentioned.
He advised the court docket that the federal government, contemplating the seriousness of the matter, filed its attraction even earlier than it obtained a duplicate of the judgement.

“We received a copy of the judgement only on May 25. We would like to bring the judgement on record and also amend the grounds of challenge in the petition,” Mehta mentioned.
The court docket allowed the identical and posted the attraction for additional listening to on June 2.