Panaji: Concluding arguments before the Bombay High Court on Saturday, Tarun Tejpal’s counsel claimed the complainant never wanted to approach police or file a complaint, and that both she and Tejpal were “political victims”.Senior advocate Aabad Ponda, appearing for Tejpal in the State’s appeal against his 2021 acquittal in a rape case, said the complainant had criticised police for “politically making this an FIR when she didn’t want it”.To support the claim, Ponda read out a social media post published by the complainant during the trial, saying her “anguish” in the message reflected her position. He argued that the post, along with social media chats and the fact that police registered a suo motu FIR, showed she did not want a complaint filed.The case relates to an alleged rape in a lift at a starred hotel more than a decade ago.Ponda referred to a post made in 2020, when the trial was underway, in which the complainant wrote about govts not caring about women’s safety and going to any extent to register complaints they come to know about through social media. “This is her summary of her entire case,” he told the court.The bench, however, pointed out the post carried the hashtag “#Hathras”, indicating it was not about her own case. Ponda maintained that despite the hashtag, the views expressed were “her own version” and “falling in line with her story”, arguing she had “spoken her heart out” about the incident.He also said the post was not made in the immediate aftermath but was “venting” seven years after the incident, and claimed she felt the matter had become a political case against her wishes.The court orally observed that if she truly did not want the case to proceed, there would not have been a chargesheet. Ponda said Tejpal was arrested and jailed for six months, his organisation was shaken, he resigned, and he had to approach the Supreme Court for bail. He further alleged the complainant had a motive to avoid filing a police complaint and wanted money, and that she deposed “grudgingly, reluctantly and against her wishes”.He cited the FIR and the investigating officer’s statements to argue police took suo motu cognisance based on media reports, and that the complainant did not want to go to police.The court observed that she ultimately went to court and deposed over several years. Ponda responded that even after deposing, she maintained she never wanted to approach police. “Just like I say I’m a political victim, she too claims she’s a political victim,” he told the court.
