Tarun Tejpal to tender public apology in defamation case
The apology will emphasize that Major General Ahluwalia neither sought nor received any financial benefits.
In a recent development, journalist Tarun Tejpal informed the Delhi High Court on Friday about his intention to publish a public apology in a national daily, explicitly stating that Major General M S Ahluwalia, an Indian Army officer, whom he had accused of corruption in defense procurement, did not accept any money. This follows a single judge's order that mandated Tejpal and Tehelka.com reporter Aniruddha Bahal to pay ₹2 crore as compensation to Major General Ahluwalia for the damage to his reputation resulting from a 2001 expose by the news portal.
During the court proceedings, Tejpal's counsel conveyed their commitment to deposit ₹10 lakh each with the court and expressed their readiness to issue an unconditional apology in a national English daily. The apology will emphasize that Major General Ahluwalia neither sought nor received any financial benefits. The court, presided over by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet PS Arora, acknowledged this undertaking and scheduled the appeal for a hearing and resolution in April to determine the appropriate amount of damages.
The high court also granted a stay on the proceedings related to the petition filed by Major General Ahluwalia, seeking the execution of the decree in his favor. Tejpal and Bahal's legal representatives asserted their financial constraints, citing an inability to afford the ₹2 crore compensation. In response, Senior advocates Siddharth Luthra and Pramod Kumar Dubey, representing Tejpal and Bahal, highlighted their willingness to deposit the specified amount and issue a public apology.
However, the counsel representing Major General Ahluwalia argued that a mere apology might not be sufficient given the prolonged stigma endured by the officer for nearly 22 years. He urged Tejpal and Bahal to deposit a "substantial" sum. The court emphasized the significance of the apology in defamation cases and assured that it would address the quantum of damages during the appeal hearing