The Supreme Court on Monday deferred the hearing on a petition filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to suspend the life imprisonment of former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the 2017 Unnao rape case. The matter is now scheduled for the first week of May.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sura Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the case will be taken up after a nine-judge bench concludes the ongoing hearing on the Sabarimala review proceedings.
The core of the dispute lies in a December 23, 2025, order by the Delhi High Court, which had suspended Sengar’s life sentence pending his appeal. The High Court had reasoned that Sengar had already served seven years and five months in prison. Furthermore, the High Court had noted that while Sengar was convicted under Section 5 (C) of the POCSO Act (aggravated penetrative sexual assault by a public servant), an elected representative might not fit the definition of a “public servant” under Section 21 of the IPC.
The CBI has vehemently challenged this interpretation. In its plea to the apex court, the agency cited the landmark L.K. Advani case, arguing that individuals holding public office, such as MPs or MLAs, are indeed “public servants.” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, described the incident as a “horrific rape” of a minor and urged the court to maintain the stay on the High Court’s order.
Current Custody Status
On December 29 last year, the Supreme Court had already stayed the High Court’s order, ensuring Sengar remained in custody. The bench noted on Monday that “substantial questions of law” have arisen that require deeper consideration.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Sengar, argued for his client’s release, noting that Sengar is also serving a separate 10-year sentence related to the custodial death of the rape survivor’s father. Rohatgi claimed that Sengar has nearly completed that 10-year term and expressed frustration over delays in the Delhi High Court regarding that specific appeal.
“Ten years is likely to be completed soon and yet no substantial hearing has taken place in the high court. I should get bail in this matter,” Rohatgi contended, further alleging that the victim’s counsel was seeking unnecessary adjournments.
In response, Advocate Mehmood Pracha, representing the survivor, clarified that only one adjournment had been sought. The Chief Justice recorded the consent of both parties that no further adjournments would be requested in the Delhi High Court proceedings.
“The lawyers will extend full cooperation [in the High Court],” the CJI remarked.
The Supreme Court reiterated that while it is generally cautious about staying bail or suspension orders without hearing the convict, the “peculiar circumstances” and the gravity of the legal questions involved necessitated the continued stay on Sengar’s release.
The Unnao rape case, which was transferred from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi in 2019 on the Supreme Court’s directions, remains one of the most high-profile legal battles involving crimes against minors and the accountability of political figures.
