The Bombay High Court on Thursday sentenced Tehelka founder Tarun Tejpal to 10 years’ jail in a 2013 rape case, overturning a Goa sessions court acquittal from 2021.Tejpal, 62, was also convicted of sexual harassment and the use of criminal force against a woman.A woman journalist colleague had accused Tejpal of sexually assaulting her, alleging that he penetrated her with his fingers, in a hotel elevator in Goa on November 7 and November 8, 2013. Goa Police registered the case on November 23 that year.The case also marked one of the earliest high-profile tests of India’s newly expanded rape law. The alleged assault took place about seven months after Parliament enacted the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which substantially broadened the legal definition of rape to include penetration by fingers or other body parts or objects. The new law came into being with effect from February 3, 2013.Before that amendment, the alleged acts would not have fallen within the legal definition of rape, though they could have attracted other offences under criminal law.We look at India’s narrow pre-2013 definition of rape, why it was changed, and how the widened scope of the amendment enabled Tejpal to be charged and prosecuted for rape, rather than a relatively lesser offence.What was the pre-2013 law?Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), till 2013, had a narrow definition of rape. It criminalised only peno-vaginal penetration. That is, the offence occurred only if a penis entered a vagina without consent. The statutory explanation to the provision stated: “Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.”Story continues below this adAlso Read | Tarun Tejpal found guilty of rape: A timeline of acquittal and convictionThe pre-2013 definition in many ways seemed to suggest that sexual assault was a legal technicality to be deciphered by the court. For so-called “lesser offences”, the yardstick of attempt to rape or preparation to rape is applied.What prompted the change?The December 16, 2012 Delhi gang rape and murder case triggered nationwide protests demanding stronger laws against sexual violence. Among the key criticisms of the existing law was that it recognised rape only as peno-vaginal penetration, leaving many serious forms of sexual assault to be prosecuted under lesser offences.In response, the Centre appointed the Justice J S Verma Committee, which submitted its report within a month, on January 23, 2013. Parliament accepted many of its recommendations by significantly expanding the legal definition of rape.Also in Explained | What are in-camera proceedings, when are they conductedThe government first promulgated the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 in February. Parliament subsequently passed the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2013 in March, and it received Presidential assent on April 2, 2013, becoming the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 the following day.What does the amended law say?Story continues below this adThe Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 significantly expanded the definition of rape under Section 375 of the IPC and introduced a mandatory minimum punishment of seven years’ imprisonment.Unlike the pre-2013 law, which recognised only peno-vaginal penetration, the amended provision recognises penetration of a penis, any object or a part of the body, “to any extent”, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman. The explanation of the provision also states that the vagina would include the labia majora.The amendment also brought non-consensual oral sex — the application of the mouth to the vagina, anus or urethra of a woman — within the definition of rape.These changes have largely been retained in India’s new criminal code, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which replaced the IPC in July 2024. The offence of rape now appears under Section 63 of the BNS.Story continues below this adThe Tejpal case became one of the earliest high-profile prosecutions under the expanded definition of rape. Under the pre-2013 law, the alleged acts would not have been seen as attracting the charge of rape. The alleged assault fell well within the ambit of the new law because of its retrospective effect from February 3, 2013.NewsletterFollow our daily newsletter so you never miss anything important. On Wednesday, we answer readers' questions.SubscribeAccording to a 2016 research report by the UN Research Institute for Social Development, the complainant herself initially saw the offence as a case of sexual harassment in the workplace. However, in a statement on November 29, 2013, the complainant explained why she believed the alleged assault amounted to rape under the newly amended law.She said in the statement: “Perhaps the hardest part of this unrelentingly painful experience has been my struggle with taxonomy. I don’t know if I am ready to see myself as a ‘rape victim’, for my colleagues, friends, supporters and critics to see me thus. It is not the victim that categorises crimes: it is the law. And in this case, the law is clear: what Mr. Tejpal did to me falls within the legal definition of rape. Now that we have a new law that broadens the definition of rape, we should stand by what we fought for.”Now, after all these years, Tejpal has been sentenced to jail for 10 years and fined Rs 10 lakh for the rape.Story continues below this adTejpal was also given a sentence of a year each for sexual harassment and criminal assault of a woman. These will run concurrently with the rape sentence. The court gave him four weeks to surrender. Tejpal has indicated he will file an appeal in the Supreme Court.