As if the charges against high-profile magazine editor Tarun Tejpal were not sensational enough already, the case has now taken a bizarre turn. Tejpal has been in jail in Goa since the end of 2013. He was accused by a young female employee of sexual assault on two occasions, and one of his actions amounts to rape according to India’s new law, Criminal Law (Amendment) Act. The young woman, a journalist with his magazine, Tehelka, Tejpal and others were all in Goa for “ThinkFest” organised by the magazine. The details of the accusation hit the public domain when a letter of apology by Tejpal was leaked on social media. In that, Tejpal apologised “unconditionally” to the victim, said the incidents were a “shameful lack of judgment”, a “moment of insanity” and that he held himself “accountable”. In a letter to Shoma Chaudhury, managing editor of Tehelka, he “recused” himself from office for six months as “atonement cannot be just words” so that he could undergo “the penance that lacerates me”.
However, as matters spiralled out of Tejpal’s control, several people quit Tehelka, the Goa police took suo moto notice of the young woman’s complaint letter to Chaudhury, which was all over the Internet, and arrested Tejpal. Later, the young woman also filed an official complaint.
There was initial distaste for Tejpal and his actions, especially after the very detailed and graphic letter of complaint sent by the young woman to Chaudhury became public. Many former colleagues were in shock at Tejpal’s behaviour, many others said they knew this day was coming. Very few stood up for him then. But as Tejpal’s bail applications were turned down by the magistrate in Goa, he appears to have found new favour in some sections of the media.
Whispers about a “BJP campaign” against him have surfaced, although no one has as yet gone far enough to say that the young woman was a Bharatiya Janata Party decoy out to frame Tejpal. The man himself started saying that the incidents were consensual, that the woman was seen at parties after the incidents thus proving nothing happened and that the CCTV footage would prove him right. The problem here is that both incidents were supposed to have happened in a hotel lift, where there are no cameras.
And now, two journalists — Seema Mustafa and Manu Joseph — and one filmmaker — Anurag Kashyap — claim to have seen the footage. And for two of them at least, Mustafa and Kashyap, Tejpal stands vindicated. The girl did not look traumatised enough, did not run away fast enough and had got some facts wrong in her complaint letter. Joseph wrote what the Outlook editor called a more “nuanced” piece entitled “What the elevator saw” which started with paragraphs on Tejpal’s daughter’s love for her father. The tone of the piece tilts towards a Tejpal defence, whose life has now been “destroyed”.
There is no argument that Tejpal is entitled to a defence. And the accusations against him have to be proved in a court of law. But this method of trying to influence public opinion on the eve of the trial is underhand and insidious. As a nation we have been through massive turmoil over violence against women. It has become a part of our national discourse like never before. Sensitivity to victims of sexual abuse was suddenly seen as important. People who voiced old, established ways of thinking pertaining to a woman’s behaviour or dress as justification for an attack were rapped soundly on the knuckles. There was a feeling that there was a conflict between the old and new India, that the men who attacked the young woman in Delhi in December 2012 resented her independence. Blaming the victim, many decided, was no longer acceptable.
So what do we have now? A liberal, independent male editor and a liberal, independent young woman journalist: there is no conflict here of us versus them, India versus Bharat, city versus village, slum versus apartment, tradition versus individuality. And yet, the language that is being built around Tejpal’s defence is exactly the same as those old, tired and sexist arguments. What was she wearing, why was she at a party after the incidents, why was she not weeping and tearing at her hair when she walked out of the lift. And most dangerously, we have a slant towards political polarisation being attempted here.
Tehelka swept into public limelight when it did a sting operation on defence deals which led to BJP president Bangaru Laxman losing his job for taking a bribe on camera. The BJP is seen as anti-Tehelka and Tehelka as pro-everyone who is against the BJP. Goa is a BJP-ruled state and therefore this entire case is about revenge.
How much further can one degrade a woman’s suffering by giving such a dangerous slant to a case of sexual assault? To insinuate that this entire case is a political conspiracy would be ludicrous if it were not so outrageous. There is also the issue that these tapes that so many have seen are actually evidence in a court case and one which is significant for at least two reasons. Firstly, sexual harassment cases rarely go anywhere in India. Secondly, this is the first time India’s new laws on rape will be on trial: Tejpal is charged with rape because after the gangrape of December 2012, on popular demand, after pressure from activists and the media including Tehelka, rape laws were changed so that any “penetration” amounts to rape. Tejpal has been accused of using his fingertips.
Whatever the truth in this case is, the fact is that no one knows what the elevator saw except the two people who were in it. A court case will examine evidence and testimony from both parties. If Tejpal feels he is being unfairly treated, much of that is because of his own florid apologies to his accuser and to his magazine editor. His case is hardly helped when he turns on the victim and then uses friends in the media to push his case. Such “adamantine” resolve belies those early claims of “atonement”. Whatever the elevator saw, this laceration of a victim does not sound penitent at all.
