DC Edit | HC Verdict On Tejpal Is Welcome
Unfortunately, Tejpal, who demanded accountability from governments and public institutions, himself failed to meet the standards that he set out for others. The law, of course, must treat a celebrity and an ordinary citizen alike, and no person deserves harsher punishment merely because he or she is famous. However, public stature carries a greater moral responsibility
The Bombay high court’s decision to sentence former Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment in the 2013 rape case deserves to be welcomed. This verdict is important because it shows that fame, influence and professional accomplishment cannot become shields against accountability.
The importance of the verdict extends beyond one individual. Tejpal was not merely a journalist. As the founder-editor of Tehelka, which is reputed for exposing wrongdoing among the powerful, he occupied a position of considerable influence and public trust. The high court, which overturned his 2021 acquittal, through its judgment enhanced people’s trust in the judiciary.
Unfortunately, Tejpal, who demanded accountability from governments and public institutions, himself failed to meet the standards that he set out for others. The law, of course, must treat a celebrity and an ordinary citizen alike, and no person deserves harsher punishment merely because he or she is famous. However, public stature carries a greater moral responsibility.
Celebrities, political leaders, journalists, entrepreneurs and others, whose actions influence society, should understand that privilege cannot be divorced from responsibility. Their behaviour often becomes an example — for good or bad — to crores.
The 2013 case also underlines an important principle in sexual assault jurisprudence. Courts declared that there is no prescribed manner in which a victim must behave after an assault. The earlier trial had attracted criticism for assessing whether the complainant displayed “behaviour” expected of a victim.
While Tejpal retains his constitutional right to challenge his conviction before the Supreme Court, the high court verdict — unless overturned by an appeal — stands as a powerful reminder that reputation cannot substitute for character and influence cannot confer immunity. People who are in places of power and trust must not merely preach standards to society. They must exemplify them. The higher the pedestal, the greater the obligation to remain beyond reproach.