The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court on Thursday ordered the Additional Sessions Judge, who acquitted former Tehelka Editor-in-Chief Tarun Tejpal of rape charges, to redact the references to the identity of prosecutrix and her family members in the judgment. .The single-judge Bench of Justice SC Gupte passed the order after it was brought to the notice of the Court by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that the judgment revealed the prosecutrix's identity by making references to her email id and her husband's name."The order which is made available to this court, and which the court is informed is not yet uploaded on the website, contains reference to the victim’s husband and her email id. Considering the law against disclosure of identity of victim in offence such as the one here. It is directed to the trial court to redact the two references to the victim’s husband and her email id in the judgment while uploading the judgment. So also the reference to the name of the mother of the prosecutrix mentioned therein may be redacted," the High Court ordered. .The Court ordered the same in the appeal preferred by the State of Goa against the acquittal of Tejpal in the case. It also permitted the State to add additional grounds in the appeal memo, as the May 21 judgment of the Sessions Court was only received on May 25..Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the State along with Advocate General Devidas Pangam in the matter. At the outset, SG Mehta pointed out that the judgment passed by the Sessions Court discloses the identity of the complainant and that the victim’s husband’s name and email id are also mentioned..On the fact that the victim approached Senior Advocate Indira Jaising before giving her statement, SG Mehta said,"According to me it was right, approaching a lawyer of her repute...then there are submissions that this may have led to doctoring of events. To accuse a lawyer of her stature of doctoring?".Possibility of doctoring of events with the help of experts: Goa Court in Tarun Tejpal acquittal.He then requested the Court to keep the matter for next week. When the Court asked why it could not be heard in the normal course, he replied,"Normally I would have bowed down. But in this case, there is so much in the judgment.. It is important for women to know that the High Court took immediate cognisance.".The Court then took on record SG Mehta's request to put the order on record and also amend the grounds in the appeal since the State received the judgment only on May 25.The matter will be heard next on June 2..The State clarified in its appeal that it did not have an ordinary or certified copy of the impugned judgment, as the same was not uploaded by the trial court.The appeal had been filed based on the pronouncement of the operative part of the judgment where Additional Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi stated that Tejpal was "acquitted"..The Sessions Judge did not read out any reasoning/finding as to why and on what grounds the accused was declared to be acquitted. Hence the State sought leave to file detailed grounds in support of the present petition when the judgment is made available.Despite not knowing the reasonings and findings, the State contended that the impugned order has been arrived at by ignoring the vital submissions made by the prosecution..Tejpal was accused of rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. He had denied the charge simpliciter. However, the documents on record in the form of apology emails and answers to relevant questions in the statements recorded were inconsistent with the denial.The case of the defence was that the alleged act was mutual and reciprocal despite categorical statements of the prosecutrix that the accused had imposed himself on her. .The appeal contended that the defence tried to portray the accused as a model of rectitude and that the case against Tejpal was part of a political vendetta. However, the defence failed to adduce the necessary material in support of such a claim, the appeal stated..Additional Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi had, on May 21, acquitted Tejpal of sexual assault charges alleged by a female colleague..The case dates back to 2013, when Tejpal was accused of sexually assaulting a junior colleague in an elevator of a high-end hotel in Goa.The Goa Police subsequently registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Tejpal for various offences including rape.He was arrested in November 2013 and later released on bail in July 2014.The trial against Tejpal commenced in 2017. In the meanwhile, he had moved the Bombay High Court for quashing the case against him, claiming that the charges were fabricated.The High Court had dismissed the plea after which he appealed to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court also refused to interfere and rejected his petition on August 19, 2019.