New Delhi, Aug 24 The Supreme Court said on Monday that it will consider on Tuesday a plea by journalist Tarun Tejpal seeking exemption from surrendering after he was convicted of rape and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment by the Bombay high court.
A bench of Justice Alok Aradhe said Tejpal’s counsel, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, has not addressed the court on the merit of the application seeking exemption.
"With a view to afford him an opportunity to address the court on the aforesaid I.A., list the same for consideration on August 25, 2026," the bench said.
At the outset, Sibal submitted that an application seeking exemption from surrender be listed before the court on August 31.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Goa government, opposed the submission and said that under the Supreme Court Rules of 2013, until and unless Tejpal surrenders, his main appeal cannot be listed before the regular court.
The bench referred to the court's 2006 decision in the Mayuram Subramanian Srinivasan versus CBI case and said it is mandatory to surrender before the appeal is to be heard.
"Therefore, until and unless, suitable orders are passed on the application seeking exemption from surrender, the appeal cannot be listed before the court. Therefore, the prayer made to list the matter before the court without considering the application seeking exemption from surrender, cannot be accepted," the bench said in its order.
Earlier during the day, the bench after hearing both Sibal and Mehta briefly said it would pass an order on Tejpal's plea for exemption from surrendering. Mehta had submitted that Tejpal's plea was not maintainable as the journalist had not filed a separate application for exemption from surrendering.
He said the plea was not maintainable also for the reason that Tejpal had not furnished a certificate that he had already surrendered as per the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.
Sibal countered the submission saying that the Supreme Court Rules did not apply to the case as the high court had already granted him four weeks to surrender. Mehta referred to earlier top court decisions and said that where the appeal has been filed, it shall expressly state whether the convict has surrendered.
He said in a case where the convict has not surrendered, the appeal should not be accepted unless accompanied by an exemption application from surrendering.
Mehta said, "The existence of the appeal is dependent on either filing a certificate that he has surrendered or, alternatively, he will have to pray for exemption from surrendering. These are only two options. Look at the seriousness of the matter."
Sibal urged the bench to list the matter on August 31 before the regular bench as Tejpal has time till the first week of September to surrender.
"I don't know why my friend (Mehta) insists that I must go to jail when I'm protected… We are not seeking any extension. I'm already protected. Please list the matter on August 31," Sibal urged the bench.
The bench said that it would pass orders in the matter and reserved its decision.
On Monday, Tejpal's plea was listed in chamber matters, where cases are taken up for preliminary or procedural directions and then placed before a regular bench for hearing.
On August 20, Tejpal moved the court challenging the August 6 order of the Bombay high court against his conviction in a 2013 sexual assault case.
Earlier, the Goa government moved the top court seeking an enhanced sentence for the former editor of Tehelka, contending that the case warranted imprisonment for life.
The high court convicted Tejpal of rape and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, overturning his acquittal by the trial court five years ago.
Tejpal was convicted of raping a junior colleague inside a hotel elevator in 2013 during an event organised by the magazine in Goa. Earlier, the 62-year-old journalist had claimed that he was a political victim.
In a petition filed in the apex court, the Goa government has contended that the sentence imposed by the high court is grossly disproportionate to the nature and gravity of the offences committed by Tejpal.
In its verdict, the high court had termed the trial court's 2021 order "perverse", noting that it fell for the notion that a sexual assault complainant must be a "perfect victim" and should conduct herself in a certain way so as to appear credible.
The high court had asked Tejpal to surrender within two weeks but later extended the period to four weeks on a request from his lawyers.
In its 81-page judgment, the high court had expressed strong disapproval of the way the defence put the victim in the dock and focused on her personal life, and said it found it surprising that the trial court "remained silent and allowed the defence to harass and humiliate her during the cross-examination".
Tejpal was convicted under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 376(2)(f) (rape committed by a person in a position of trust or authority), 354(a) (sexual harassment) and 354(b) (assault or use of criminal force with intent to disrobe). Under Section 376(2)(f), the maximum punishment is life imprisonment.
