Tarun Tejpal | SabrangIndia

Supreme Court closes contempt case against Prashant Bhushan and Tarun Tejpal

Wed, 31 Aug 2022 12:37:42 +0000

Image Courtesy: indianexpress.com

On August 30, the Supreme Court closed the 2009 contempt case initiated against Advocate Prashant Bhushan and former Tehelkar editor Tarun Tejpal, over Bhushan’s interview given to Tehelka magazine in which he said that several previous Chief Justices of India were corrupt, reported LiveLaw.

A bench comprising Justice Indira Banerjee, Surya Kant and MM Sundresh closed the proceedings initiated for making remarks against past CJIs, in view of the explanation given by Prashant Bhushan and that an apology has been tendered by Tarun Tejpal, as informed by Senior Advocate Kamini Jaiswal appearing for Bhushan and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for Tarun Tejpal.

The bench reportedly stated, “In view of the apology tendered by the contemnors, we do not deem it necessary to proceed with the contempt. The contempt proceedings are dropped.”

This case pertains to Bhushan’s interview to Tehelka magazine in 2009 wherein he had allegedly made statements about corruption against SC judges. Bhushan had allegedly implied that at least half of the 16 previous Chief Justices were corrupt, but he could not provide any evidence to support his claims. The SC took up the case suo moto after senior advocate Harish Salve filed a complaint.

In January 2010, a bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph and HL Dattu issued notices to Bhushan as well as Tehelka’s then Editor-in-Chief Tarun Tejpal. The contempt petition was held maintainable by a three-judge bench in November 2010 and after that it was heard 17 times.

On August 4, 2020, the court asked Bhushan’s lawyer if he was willing to tender an apology. But Bhushan declined and offered an explanation instead, insisting that his words were misunderstood. In a press release, Bhushan clarified, “In my interview to Tehelka in 2009 I have used the word corruption in a wide sense meaning lack of propriety. I did not mean only financial corruption or deriving any pecuniary advantage. If what I have said caused hurt to any of them or to their families in any way, I regret the same. I unreservedly state that I support the institution of the judiciary and especially the Supreme Court of which I am a part, and had no intention to lower the prestige of the judiciary in which I have complete faith. I regret if my interview was misunderstood as doing so, that is, lower the reputation of the judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, which could never have been my intention at all.”

In August 2020, the Supreme Court had found Bhushan guilty of contempt over some of his tweets and fined him a token Re. 1. The Court had held that his tweets were based on distorted facts and constituted a scurrilous/malicious attack on the entire Supreme Court and had the effect of destabilising the very foundation of the judiciary, reported the Indian Express.

The court, while making a final reference to the two tweets, the court stated, “It is not expected of a person who is a part of the system of administration of justice and who owes a duty to the said system, to make such tweets which are capable of shaking the confidence of general public and further making wild allegations in the affidavit thereby further attempting to malign the said institution.”

The court further held that “Fair criticism is not to be silenced, but an advocate has to remind himself/herself, where he/she crosses the zone of propriety, and the Court cannot continuously ignore it, and the system cannot be made to suffer. When the criticism turns into malicious and scandalous allegations thereby tending to undermine the confidence of the public and the institution as a whole, such a criticism cannot be ignored.”

The court had referred to the press conference held by former senior most judges of the Supreme Court on January 12, 2018. Bhushan had justified his averments based on this press conference. The court opined, “We hope it was the first and the last occasion that the Judges have gone to press, and God gives wisdom to protect its dignity by internal mechanism, particularly, when allegations made, if any, publicly cannot be met by sufferer Judges. It would cause suffering to them till eternity.”

The post Supreme Court closes contempt case against Prashant Bhushan and Tarun Tejpal appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bombay HC issues notice in State’s appeal against Tarun Tejpal’s acquittal

Wed, 02 Jun 2021 09:06:53 +0000

Image Courtesy:barandbench.com

The Bombay High Court at Goa has issued a notice to journalist Tarun Tejpal in an appeal against his acquittal in a case where was accused of raping his former colleague at Tehelka magazine.

The High Court observed that prima facie, a case was made out for considering leave and issued notice, returnable on June 24, according to Bar & Bench. The court has called for all papers and proceedings from the Sessions Court, in the interim.

LiveLaw quoted Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Goa government, saying, “The law has evolved. The entire judgement proceeds as if the victim is on trial.” He said that the judgement and the court’s approach show a complete lack of sensitivity and knowledge on the subject of crime against women.

Justice SC Gupte sarcastically added that the trial court’s judgement acquitting Tejpal “appears to provide a manual on how rape victims should behave.” Mehta added, “There is a reference that the accused consulted senior lawyers Indira Jaising and Rebecca John. This conduct has seriously gone against the victim. If this girl would have approached me, I would have asked her to consult them. They are feminists,” reported LiveLaw.

On May 21, Goa’s Trial Court’s Special Judge Kshama Joshi acquitted Tejpal, and the 527-page judgment reportedly commented on the survivor’s conduct and behaviour post the alleged assault. The court observed that the complainant “did not demonstrate any kind of normative behaviour” that a victim of sexual assault “might plausibly show”.

On May 27, a Vacation Bench of Justice SC Gupte directed the Sessions Court to redact statements that give away the survivor’s identity from the judgement before uploading on the website. The court had also granted 3 days’ time to the State which has filed an appeal against the judgment, to amend the grounds of its appeal and fixed the next date of hearing on June 2.

Tejpal was charged for offences under Indian Penal Code sections of 354 (assault or criminal force with intent to outrage modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354B (assault or use of force against woman with intent to disrobe), 341 (wrongful restraint), 342 (wrongful confinement), 376 (2)(f) (person in position of authority over women, committing rape) and 376(2)(k) (rape by person in position of control). He was accused of forcing himself on a colleague, inside an elevator of the Grand Hyatt, Bambolim, Goa during Tehelka magazine’s official event, in November 2013.

The matter will be heard on June 24.

The post Bombay HC issues notice in State’s appeal against Tarun Tejpal’s acquittal appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Tarun Tejpal case: Bom HC directs trial court to redact statements revealing survivor’s identity

Fri, 28 May 2021 04:54:53 +0000

Image Courtesy:hindustantimes.com

The Bombay High Court at Goa has directed the Sessions Court, that acquitted Tarun Tejpal in a sexual assault case, to redact statements that give away the victim’s identity from the judgement before uploading on the website.

The vacation bench of Justice SC Gupte has, at the same time, granted 3 days’ time to the State which has filed an appeal against the order, to amend the grounds of its appeal and fixed the next date of hearing on June 2. The State had filed appeal on May 25 against the acquittal of Tejpal on all charges by District and Sessions Court, Mapusa. In the 572 page judgment by Special Judge Kshama Joshi, there were comments that the complainant “did not demonstrate any kind of normative behaviour” that a victim of sexual assault “might plausibly show”.

This acquittal order comes despite Tejpal’s admission to the assault that was part of the evidence in the trial. As per an Indian Express report, in an e-mail sent to the survivor on November 19, and another, titled “Atonement”, Tejpal wrote: “I apologise unconditionally for the shameful lapse of judgement that led me to attempt a sexual liaison with you on two occasions on 7 November and 8 November 2013, despite your clear reluctance that you did not want such attention from me”.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the State before the High Court for the appeal and took objection to the comments made by the trial court about the survivor’s actions. “As per this judgement, any victim of sexual assault has to exhibit her trauma and less she does that her testimony cannot be believed,” LiveLaw quoted him as saying.

When the bench questioned why a regular appeal was not filed, SG Mehta reportedly responded, “In such matters, the system expects sensitivity, apart from legal jurisprudence. Both of which are lacking in this case. We owe it to our girls that this is taken up by the high Court at the earliest.”

Identity of the survivor

SG Mehta then pointed out that the judgement discloses the identity of the complainant and her husband, which is prohibited under section 228A of IPC. Thus, the court directed that the references to the survivor’s identity including her husband’s name, her email id as well as her mother’s name be redacted before it is uploaded on the website. “Considering the law against disclosure of the identity of the victim of an offence of such as the one in which we are concerned, it is in the interest of justice to have these paras redacted,” the court stated, as per LiveLaw’s report.

In January, the Aurangabad bench of Bombay High Court had passed a detailed judgement issuing guidelines on how to avoid disclosing identity of a victim or survivor of a sexual assault or rape offence as laid out under section 228 of IPC which penalizes revealing of identity of victim of offence of rape (Section 376 and sub-sections) with imprisonment of up to 2 years and fine. The court had observed that while framing of charge, recording evidence, recording statement of accused under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, name of the victim is disclosed and thus directed that in such processed also mentioning name of the victim should be avoided and instead he/she should be referred to as ‘X’.

The post Tarun Tejpal case: Bom HC directs trial court to redact statements revealing survivor’s identity appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Tarun Tejpal case: What should a rape survivor look like?

Wed, 26 May 2021 14:00:55 +0000

Image Courtesy:livelaw.in

After a trial court in Goa acquitted journalist Tarun Tejpal in a sexual assault case, observing that there was no evidence to support the allegations made by the complainant, a woman who was his junior colleague at Tehelka magazine, the state’s Cheif Minister Pramod Sawant has reported said he “vows” to fight the case till the woman gets justice. According to a report in Zee News, the Goa CM called the court’s order “unfortunate” adding that the state government will challenge it in the High Court.

On May 21, the former editor-in-chief of Tehelka, Tarun Tejpal was acquitted of charges of sexual harassment and rape of his colleague in 2013. Tejpal was charged for offences under Indian Penal Code sections of 354 (assault or criminal force with intent to outrage modesty), 354A (sexual harassment), 354B (assault or use of force against woman with intent to disrobe), 341 (wrongful restraint), 342 (wrongful confinement), 376 (2)(f) (person in position of authority over women, committing rape) and 376(2)(k) (rape by person in position of control).

After a copy of the judgement became public, the Goa government announced that it has filed an appeal in the Bombay High Court against Tejpal’s acquittal. According to news reports,Goa CM Pramod Sawant said, “We have filed an appeal in Bombay High Court against the verdict (acquittal of Tarun Tejpal, former editor-in-chief of Tehelka magazine, in alleged sexual assault case). The state government will fight this case until the woman gets justice.”

Tejpal, who was released on bail earlier, had pleaded “not guilty”, and had even moved the Supreme Court seeking that the charges levelled against him be quashed. However the SC did not quash the charges and directed that the trial be concluded within six months, stated media reports.

Now, the news reports of verdict in the closely followed case of the alleged assault that took place at a Goa hotel in 2013, quote the the District and Sessions judge observing that the complainant “did not demonstrate any kind of normative behaviour” that a victim of sexual assault “might plausibly show”. The Court reportedly noted, “The unnatural conduct of the prosecutrix is again relevant under Section 8 of the Evidence Act. The prosecutrix had admitted that there are two SMSes sent from her phone to the accused on 8/11/2013…..and that these messages were not sent by her in response to any messages.”

The over 500 page order by Additional Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi states, “Upon considering evidence on record…benefit of doubt is given to the accused because there is no corroborative evidence supporting the allegations made by the complainant girl.” She ruled that there was no medical evidence and there were “facts” that “create doubt on (her) truthfulness,” reported The Indian Express.

The court stated that the woman’s messages to the accused “clearly establish” that she was neither “traumatised nor terrified” and this “completely belies” the prosecution’s case. The court said that benefit of doubt is given to the accused because there is no corroborative evidence supporting the allegations made by the complainant.

According to a report in NDTV, the court added that the complainant has made many conflicting statements. “There are many evidence on record which create doubt on the truthfulness of the complainant girl,” the court reportedly observed. The court has also observed that the Investigating Officer or IO (Crime Branch officer Sunita Sawant) did not conduct investigation on vital points of the case. “It cannot be lost site (sight) that rape causes the greatest distress and humiliation to the victim but at the same time a false allegation of rape can cause an equal distress and humiliation and damage to the accused as well,” observed the court adding that there were omissions and commissions while conducting the investigation, and that the IP “destroyed crucial piece of evidence in terms of CCTV footage of the first floor of 7th block of the hotel, which was clear proof of innocence of the accused”. The court said that the Investigating Officer “did not verify the operation and functioning of the lift panel of block 7 (of the hotel) to prove that opening of lift can be stopped or not” nor did the IO investigate whether the lift can be prevented from opening or can be kept in circuit by pressing a button as alleged by the complainant.

The court noted that Sunita Sawant the (initial) complainant (Goa police took suo motu cognisance of the allegations) can not be Investigation Officer in the case but she did not move any proposal to her superiors to hand over the investigation to another officer, reported NDTV. The order has said the CCTV footage indicates that the lift in fact opened twice on the ground floor whereas the woman claimed the lift did not open at all. According to the court, the IO admitted that there is a “contradiction between CCTV footage and statement of the complainant girl,” yet did not record a supplementary statement. According to the judge “the contradictions are often so glaring that the exact opposite of what the complainant girl is claiming yet IO did not question the complainant girl. It is settled proposition that acquittal of the accused can not result due to defects in the investigation, the evidences have to be scrutinised independently.”

Indian Women’s Press Corp (IWPC) disappointed with acquittal

The Indian Women’s Press Corp (IWPC) has said it “stands in solidarity with the survivor” and that it took “great courage for the young woman journalist to come out against her editor and fight tirelessly for eight years in a system that is skewed in favour of men.”

According to the women journalists group, the acquittal of Tejpal “a powerful editor who himself admitted to “the shameful lapse of judgement that led me to attempt a sexual liaison with you on two occasions on 7 November and 8 November 2013, despite your clear reluctance that you did not want such attention from me” — has made the fight for justice harder for women.” The IWPC welcomed the Goa government’s decision to appeal against the session court’s judgment.

Network of Women in Media, India applauds survivor’s courage, determination

Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI) applauds the survivor’s courage, and determination during the seven-and-a-half-year journey of the case so far. They stated her her “struggle has been the struggle of every woman facing sexual harassment and sexual violence at the workplace and attempting to push back the asymmetric power of dominant men in the media.”

According to the NWMI, the case also “highlighted the continuing inadequacy of mechanisms and processes to combat sexual harassment in media workplaces. That, unfortunately, has not noticeably changed since 2013, despite the enactment of the Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act earlier that year.”

The post Tarun Tejpal case: What should a rape survivor look like? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Goa court acquits journalist Tarun Tejpal in rape case

Fri, 21 May 2021 14:17:06 +0000

Image Courtesy:economictimes.indiatimes.com

A trial court in Goa has acquitted former editor-in-chief of Tehelka, Tarun Tejpal of charges of sexual harassment and rape of his colleague in 2013.

According to Bar & Bench, the judgment was pronounced by Additional Sessions Judge Kshama Joshi and in a statement issued shortly after his acquittal, Tejpal thanked a host of lawyers who represented him in this matter. These lawyers include Pramod Dubey, Aamir Khan, Ankur Chawla, Amit Desai, Kapil Sibal, Salman Khurshid, Aman Lekhi, Sandeep Kapoor, Raian Karanjawala, Ravi Sharma, Abhimanyu Bhandari and Shrikant Shivade.

This acquittal order comes despite Tejpal’s admission to the assault that was part of the evidence in the trial. As per an Indian Express report, an e-mail sent to the survivor on November 19, and another, titled “Atonement”, sent to Tehelka’s then managing editor Shoma Chaudhury on November 20, along with the survivor’s statement constituted the primary evidence against him.

In the email, with the subject line ‘atonement’, Tejpal wrote: “I apologise unconditionally for the shameful lapse of judgement that led me to attempt a sexual liaison with you on two occasions on 7 November and 8 November 2013, despite your clear reluctance that you did not want such attention from me”.

Besides the email and the survivor’s statements, the crime branch also found a crucial bit of a CCTV footage from the hotel that seemed to have corroborated with the survivor’s statement.

Some have pointed out that Tarun Tejpal’s press release thanking his lawyers and the court for its “rigorous, impartial and fair trial” was prepared even before the verdict, as it carries the date May 19, that is eventually overwritten by May 21. The judgment that was earlier supposed to be pronounced on May 19 was deferred to May 21.

Tarun Tejpal’s press release was prepared in advance for release on a prior date when the court adjourned delivering judgment? He had written 19 th first, which was the last date of hearing. What does it say? pic.twitter.com/tVFo82DYxS

— Vinod K. Jose (@vinodjose) May 21, 2021

“The law is a system that protects everybody who can afford a good lawyer.” — Mark Twain https://t.co/jrvxEEXYbA

— Sohini (@Mittermaniac) May 21, 2021

Women Rights activists have condemned the verdict, questioning the grounds on which he has been acquitted. All India Progressive Women’s Association secretary Kavita Krishnan tweeted, “At the end of it all, the courageous woman did not get even a tiny taste of justice. Rape trials are deeply violent towards survivors. Yet again, a survivor has been demeaned, humiliated, and let down.”

At the end of it all, the courageous woman did not get even a tiny taste of justice. Rape trials are deeply violent towards survivors. Yet again, a survivor has been demeaned, humiliated, and let down.

— Kavita Krishnan (@kavita_krishnan) May 21, 2021

She also highlighted how Tejpal has gotten away with this verdict despite having penned down several apologies admitting to the incident, with the survivor having her integrity “smeared in court and in social parties.”

Women rights activist and cyber safety expert, Akancha Srivastava expressed her displeasure at the judgment and said, “Should girls/women even bother filing formal complaints, fighting cases for decades? Genuine question. What is even the point?”

Should girls/women even bother filing formal complaints, fighting cases for decades? Genuine question.
What is even the point?#TarunTejpal https://t.co/zTlswnNd4u

— Akancha Srivastava (@AkanchaS) May 21, 2021

Equal Rights activist, Harish Iyer also shared his dissatisfaction at the demoralising verdict of the court while speaking to SabrangIndia. He said, “As a fellow rape survivor and as somebody who was a witness in this case, I am utterly disappointed. Our systems should enable women instead of discouraging them.”

Expressing his anguish about how another abuser will walk free, he recalled how there was an “entire campaign to malign her” (survivor), raising questions about her character, the fact that she consumed alcohol or the way she behaved post her assault. He said, “This is disgusting, there is no manual to show how a rape survivor must behave!” Not having any knowledge about whether the complainant will appeal against this order, Mr. Iyer said that we must all support and stand by her, despite all odds.

Here is a timeline of the 8-year-old sexual assault case:

November 7, 2013:

A junior colleague accuses Tarun Tejpal of sexually assaulting her in Goa’s Grand Hyatt hotel’s elevator.

November 20, 2013:

Tarun steps down as the editor-in-chief in light of the sexual assault allegations.

November 22, 2013:

The Goa police files an FIR against him, based on the survivor’s complaint.

November 30, 2013:

He is arrested by the Goa Police.

February 17, 2014:

Goa’s crime branch files a 2,846-page charge sheet which also contains Tejpal’s formal apology e-mail to the survivor and Tehelka’s then managing editor, Shoma Chaudhury.

July 1, 2014:

After spending over 6 months in jail, the Supreme Court grants him bail and asks him to submit his passport to the court.

26 September, 2017:

Tejpal makes the plea against framing of charges in the Bombay High Court in Goa, but the court refuses to stay the framing of charges.

September 28, 2017:

Tejpal is officially charged with rape and wrongful confinement by the trial court in Goa.

December 6, 2017:

The Supreme Court directs the trial court to begin trial in the case.

August 9, 2019:

Tejpal moves top court seeking quashing of FIR against him. The SC rejects his plea terming the offence “morally abhorrent” and an “assault on the privacy of the victim”, and asked the trial court to complete trial in six months.

The matter kept getting put on hold due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

October 28, 2020:

The Supreme Court asks the court to complete the trial by March 31, 2021.

May 12, 2021:

Case gets listed for judgment but court defers it till May 19.

May 19, 2021:

Case listed for judgment but court defers it till May 21.

May 21, 2021:

Goa trial court acquits Tarun Tejpal of all charges.

The post Goa court acquits journalist Tarun Tejpal in rape case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It’s A ‘Lose Lose’ Situation for most Sexual Harassment/Rape Complainants

Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:02:39 +0000

Think Recent Articles on #Pachauri, #Tejpal Cases

The apologia for Pachauri carried by the Observer (The Guardian's sister paper), quotes him saying it is suspicious that the complainant documented thousands of his messages. “What is disturbing [is] that right from the first day over a period of about 16 months she was creating and assembling an archive of messages, which to anyone would seem very unusual,” he says. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/26/rajendra-pachauri-hits-back-harassed-female-colleague-claims?CMP=twt_a-environment_b-gdneco

If a complainant of sexual violence fails to show documentary evidence, she is accused of lying – why didn't she document it all, why did she delete a WhatsApp message she claims to have sent to a friend about the violence, why is she pretending not to know how WhatsApp works, she must be lying, etc. And if she DOES meticulously document prolonged sexual harassment, why, how suspicious, why would an innocent woman document messages from her boss! For a woman complainant, it is always Lose, Lose – because she is always The Accused.

Her behaviour is always suspicious. And if the accused is a big gun who can pull strings, and get international and national papers to carry versions slanted towards him, suggesting the complainant was both 'flirtatious' and part of a 'conspiracy' by climate change sceptics/communalists/secularists etc, if legal processes like chargesheets and trials are endlessly delayed in blatant mockery of the law, well, that's life, isn't it?

The woman complainant in the Tejpal case has just written to the Editor of the Mumbai Mirror about a slanted piece full of factual errors calculated to create sympathy for the accused, with zero journalistic concern for the complainant http://kafila.org/2016/03/28/response-to-shantanu-guha-rays-mumbai-mirror-article-on-tarun-tejpal/. The Mumbai Mirror piece http://www.mumbaimirror.com/mumbai/crime/Rape-charges-against-Tarun-Tejpal-Over-2-years-on-trial-yet-to-begin/articleshow/51488993.cms does not reveal that the author has a conflict of interest; it talks of the impact of a delayed trial on the accused – but does not bother to ask how such delay affects the complainant and witnesses, and it does not reflect on the fact that the delay is caused by Tejpal himself.

Tejpal has sought and obtained a stay from the Supreme Court on grounds that he has not been provided cloned copies of the CCTV footage, accuser's mobile phone, laptop etc. He got the stay in spite of the fact that the technology for such cloning is unavailable in India – would your average accused man, were he not a man with immense pull like Tejpal, be able to get such a stay on such grounds? Yet this piece talks of Tejpal as though he were the victim, the only one facing any suffering or loss to his career and life. Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie, in her TED talk on feminism, talks of how we make women feel that "being born female they're already guilty of something." https://vialogue.wordpress.com/2013/12/30/ted-we-should-all-be-feminists-chimamanda-ngozi-adichie-at-tedxeuston-transcript/

And in case after case of sexual harassment and rape, women complainants are treated as though they must have been guilty of something, while the achievements and exploits of the 'great men' they have accused, are narrated to us over and over.

'He is a Godman, he is being falsely accused by secularists'; 'he is a well respected secular figure, the complainant must be a stooge of the communalists'; 'he is an environmental hero, the complainant must be on the payroll of climate change sceptics'… This goes on and on, over and over again, in case after case.

It seems we can never pause and say of our friends, our heroes, our gurus, 'He is a friend, he is someone I love and respect, and while it is difficult for me to say this and while I am concerned for this person and find it difficult to imagine him as a sexual harasser or rapist, I will not accuse and defame the complainant and assume she is lying. I will face the possibility that this 'great man' might in fact be guilty.

I will not interfere with due process by gossiping/writing about how the complainant must be guilty, even if I assume the accused to be innocent till proved otherwise. I will reflect soberly on the huge traumatic costs – in terms of her health, her personal relationships, her career, her finances – of making a complaint against a powerful person.

And above all, if I am aware that in fact, this friend habitually behaves with a sense of sexual entitlement over women, especially women employees, I will not make excuses for such behaviour and will not suggest that modern women should not make a big deal about unwanted sexual contact by a boss/friend/mentor.

I will not say Boys Will Be Boys, Men Will Be Men, Great Men Will Be Great Men, and unwanted, forced sexual contact is something women will just have to learn to live with."The occasions on which people take such principled stands are indeed rare. And until such stands become the norm rather than the exception, sexual harassment and violence too will continue to remain the norm, not the exception.

(The author is Secretary, All India Progressive Women's Association, AIPWA)

The post It’s A ‘Lose Lose’ Situation for most Sexual Harassment/Rape Complainants appeared first on SabrangIndia.