Supreme Court Orders Tarun Tejpal to Surrender in Rape Case

Itanagar, India Aug 25, 2026 ALN: The Supreme Court has mandated journalist Tarun Tejpal to surrender within two weeks to serve a 10-year sentence for rape, as ruled by the Bombay High Court.

A bench led by Justice Alok Aradhe dismissed Tejpal's plea for exemption from surrendering, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with the court's orders.

The apex court has scheduled a hearing for his appeal against the conviction and sentence on September 22, contingent upon the submission of a surrender certificate.

Tejpal, the former editor of Tehelka, was convicted of raping a junior colleague in a hotel elevator during a 2013 event in Goa. He previously claimed to be a victim of political persecution.

On August 6, the high court overturned Tejpal's earlier acquittal and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years.

During the recent hearing, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Tejpal, argued that the incident occurred in 2013 and noted that Tejpal had already spent approximately six months in jail related to the case.

“He (Tejpal) has been on bail since then. The high court has ordered him to surrender within four weeks. This court may schedule the main appeal for hearing on August 31,” Sibal stated.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Goa government, asserted that the high court's directive for Tejpal to surrender was intended to facilitate his appeal and application for exemption from surrendering before the apex court.

“Merit is a relevant consideration in this case. It is a 10-year sentence for aggravated rape,” Mehta emphasized.

Countering Mehta's arguments, Sibal claimed, “It is not a rape at all.”

The bench inquired about the timeframe required for Tejpal to surrender. Sibal requested a two-week period for this purpose and urged the bench to expedite the hearing of the main appeal.

In rejecting Tejpal's application for exemption from surrendering, the bench stated, “If the surrender certificate is submitted by September 22, the registry is instructed to list the matter on that date.”

Tejpal's plea was addressed in chamber matters, where cases are initially reviewed for procedural directions before being assigned to a regular bench for further hearing.

On August 24, the apex court indicated it would consider Tejpal's plea for exemption from surrendering on the following Tuesday.

In its August 24 order, the bench referenced a 2006 decision in the Mayuram Subramanian Srinivasan Vs CBI case, highlighting the mandatory nature of surrender before an appeal can be heard.

“Therefore, unless suitable orders are issued regarding the application for exemption from surrender, the appeal cannot be listed before the court. Thus, the request to list the matter without considering the exemption application cannot be accepted,” the bench stated.

On August 20, Tejpal approached the apex court challenging the August 6 ruling of the high court regarding his conviction.

Previously, the Goa government had petitioned the apex court for an enhanced sentence for Tejpal, asserting that the case warranted life imprisonment.

In its petition, the Goa government contended that the sentence imposed by the high court was grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses committed by Tejpal.

The high court's 81-page judgment criticized the trial court's 2021 order as “perverse,” noting that it fell prey to the misconception that a sexual assault complainant must be a “perfect victim” and behave in a manner that appears credible.

The high court also condemned the defense's treatment of the victim during cross-examination, expressing astonishment that the trial court allowed such harassment.

Tejpal was convicted under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including 376(2)(f) (rape by a person in a position of trust or authority), 354(a) (sexual harassment), and 354(b) (assault with intent to disrobe). Under Section 376(2)(f), the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.

The high court had initially ordered Tejpal to surrender within two weeks but later extended the period to four weeks upon a request from his legal team.