PANAJI
With final arguments in the government’s appeal against the acquittal of former ‘Tehelka’ founder-editor Tarun Tejpal entering their second day on Friday, the defence argued that the survivor did not appear traumatised during the event, including while posing for photographs with Hollywood actor Robert De Niro.
Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda told the court that the complainant not only invited Tejpal to pose for a photograph with De Niro after the alleged incident but also interacted with the actor herself.
“The CCTV footage, photographs, WhatsApp messages, emails and witness testimony show that the complainant continued participating in ThinkFest events, attended social gatherings and appeared at ease during the remainder of the festival,” he said.
“The complainant’s conduct after the alleged incidents was inconsistent with the prosecution’s case that she was traumatised and fearful.”
Referring to chats and other material placed on record during the trial, Ponda argued that the complainant visited Robert De Niro’s hotel suite late at night after the alleged incidents and remained there for a considerable period.
He further submitted that WhatsApp messages showed she later discussed the encounter in intimate or sexual terms in a WhatsApp group that was subsequently deleted. According to him, the chats were later recovered from another participant’s device and form part of the trial record.
“These communications, together with CCTV footage of the complainant’s visits to De Niro’s suite, were inconsistent with the prosecution’s portrayal of her mental state after the alleged incidents,” he told the Division Bench of Justice Neela Gokhale and Justice Amit Jamsandekar.
Ponda further argued that the investigation suffered from serious lapses, including the disappearance of crucial first-floor CCTV footage from the hotel where the alleged incident took place during the ThinkFest event.
“The Investigating Officer collected and produced CCTV footage from the ground floor and the second floor, but the first-floor footage, which was critical to verifying the complainant’s version, was never produced before the trial court,” he said.
Ponda also questioned the way the electronic evidence was handled during the investigation. He submitted that the DVR containing the CCTV recordings was not seized promptly or properly secured, no hash value was generated to preserve its integrity, and the seizure of the DVR was not recorded in the case diary or the charge sheet.
