The current condition of celebrated journalist Tarun Tejpal is an illustration of a person who decided to be high moral judge and lead the society breaking away the boundaries of one’s profession but happened to have his legs sunk in filth. Tejpal's face once again monopolized front pages and prime-time news bulletin-not as a champion of truth but as a violator of the ideals he stood for.

Tejpal went to the extent of molesting an employee who was a daughter of former colleague and who was his daughter's friend. The plans he contrived even after the young girl showed courage to expose the heinous act reveal his adeptness in these matters. In fact there is no difference between the quackery of self-styled god-man -Asaram Bapu and the ‘progressive’ charlatanry of Tejpal. The matter of the allegations of sexual assault against Tehelka editor Tarun Tejpal should be dealt with in the same manner as the case against Asaram Bapu.
But like regressive Asaram Bapu the ‘progressive’ Tejpal also seemed to be an escapist and tried to run away from the law. Till now he was acting as a high moral judge as if he descended for the crusade against static and regressive journalism. Tejpal came to limelight when he shook the previous National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government with Tehelka’s investigative sting operations. Operation West End, a sting that exposed then Bharatiya Janata Party president Bangaru Laxman accepting a bribe for a defence deal from a reporter disguised as an arms dealer.

It was not that before Bangaru Laxman political leaders had not accepted money or after the sting it had stopped. But Tarun and group claimed that they had done some magnanimous work by exposing Laxman. In fact, the case exposed the stupidity of Bangaru Laxman. Perhaps, knowing the imprudence of Bangaru, Tarun and his group planned such an activity. Otherwise, why Tarun’s high moral judgment did not guide him to expose courageously how P V Narasimha Rao who was heading a minority government had sufficient numbers to prove a majority and how the present Prime Minister Manmohan Singh successfully saved the government by winning support of Amar Singh and Mulayam on the issue of Nuclear deal?

The selected morality is the distinctive feature of the so -called progressive people. The character of ‘progressive people’ is as fragile as that of Tejpal. Their morality is relative. They will go on and on if a BJP leader misbehaves but will remain silent on severe misbehavior of a congressman. There was never a scarcity of such sly people in our society. These were the people who were showering praises on Tejpal. Neither the people who praised Tejpal could keep the track nor did Tejpal himself remember what exactly he was doing.

In fact many ‘Tejpals’ have flourished on the money from politicians. Some boasted of progressiveness with the support of Kapil Sibbals’s money while some took help of local builder while some joined hands with Bhujbal. Samna and Tarun Bharat are relatively more honest because they never hide whose mouthpieces they are. But people like Tejpal pretend to be upright journalists and sell the loyalty of their pens. Some of these pseudo- progressives were exposed through Tehelka and some are unperturbed yet. If these people continued their professional duties after this they could have won some points for their honesty. But they continued their sermons to society. In fact even politicians are not that unabashed as these media people.

One more point needs to be discussed in this regard. In order to justify their actions, people like Tejpal criticize chain ownership of newspapers and claim that they posed a challenge to journalism. In fact the reality is just the opposite. Many periodicals that are owned by the editors are known to demand ransom. The misuse of such periodicals is dual. They demand ransom and on the basis of that the so- called editors-owners try to keep up their control and leadership. All choose to remain silent over the financial abuse involved because that’s what protects mutual interests. Actually, the chain newspapers are responsible to maintain professionalism.

The activities of Tejpal should be analyzed both financially and morally. People like Kapil Sibbal, Trinamool MP K D Singh and Ram Jethmalani invested in Tejpal’s venture. It means the so-called self-less and unbiased journalism flourished on the financial backings by political leaders. Even Wockhardt chief Fakhruddin Khorakiwala and Amir Khan had invested money after Tejpal’s stand on Gujarat riots.

Tejpal wanted to form a club for elites with the investment from the most controversial businessman Ponty Chchadda. The purpose of the club was to provide intellectual feast to scholars and progressive people in the country in a free and open atmosphere. One can guess what he had planned on the basis of what he did in Goa. But the most important point is how forming such a group is related to journalism? What type of morality is this that desires to gain name and fame through the medium and to use it for different purpose? When the employees of Tehelka were not getting their payments, Tejpal and the managing editor Shoma Chaudhury both were making lot of money; can it be called professional obligation?

This squalid saga is significant because its central character is a celebrated journalist who purportedly stood for the same principles of equality, trust and transparency that he has been charged of violating. Tejpal starred as iconoclast, impresario, inquisitor, lie-buster, controversialist, and conscience keeper. His appearance as an alleged sexual offender marks the lowest point in the tale of a man who has excelled in creating his own mythology.
Now-a-days many organizations are engaged in different activities other than their appointed responsibilities. Tejpal’s actions have again exposed the fact. Whatever law applies to common man should be applied to Tejpal. Such wolves in sheep clothing should not make journalism and journalists catastrophic and lackluster.