'Aggravated Penalty Given Despite Not Being Public Servant': Kuldeep Sengar Opposes Unnao Rape Conviction, Life Term Before Delhi High Court

While arguing his appeal against conviction and life sentence in the Unnao rape case, former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar told the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (May 26) the he is not a public servant and the survivor's age was such that it will not be covered under POCSO Act. He further submitted before the high court today, that the survivor's testimony was not of sterling qualify. The court was hearing Sengar's appeal, after the Supreme Court had earlier this month had set aside the high court's December order suspending his sentence and remitted it for a fresh decision. At the outset the division bench of Justice Prathiba Singh and Justice Madhu Jain orally said that Sengar should argue his appeal. Meanwhile Advocate Mehmood Pracha appearing for the survivor submitted that there was nothing special about this appeal that it should be taken out of turnHowever senior advocate N Hariharan appearing for Sengar submitted that what was special is that almost 10 years have been spent by Sengar in custody.At this stage the court orally said that considering that Sengar is in custody and he is willing for entire appeal to be heard, it was of the opinion that final hearing be taken on expeditious basis.Commencing his arguments Hariharan traced the history of the case and said that on August 7, 2019, charges were framed under 120B (criminal conspiracy) r/w 363, 366 (kidnapping), 109 r/w 376(1) (rape) IPC.Thereafter, alternate charge under Sections 5,6 POCSO were subsequently added, he said. He said that thereafter the "charge of public servant was introduced". Notably, a coordinate division bench had while suspending Sengar's sentence in December 2025 held that he could not be categorised as a “public servant” for the purposes of Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act or Section 376(2)(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).Meanwhile Hariharan informed the court that Sengar was convicted under Sections 376 IPC, Sections 5(c) and 6 of POCSO"One person was acquitted. So the conspiracy (120B) goes. Life sentence under 376(2) is awarded, though I was made a charge under Section 376(1). 376(2) relates to public servant, which I wasn't charged with," Hariharan said. On the court's query regarding Sengar's qualifications Hariharan said that he was an MLA, but not of the concerned area where the offence had taken place. "I was MLA of Bangarmau (Unnao, UP). This area where offence happened took place in Safipur constituency. Whether Appellant will fall under public servant. Let's come to POCSO Act for a minute. Section 2 definition provision nowhere defines public servant. So IPC definition will be used to define public servant for both legislations. Section 21 IPC defines it. MLAs are not covered under this definition," he urged. The senior counsel further said that this aggravated form of sentence couldn't be imposed on him, adding that for a charge that wasn't framed against him, a sentence was "awarded of utmost severity that my entire biological life is gone". Hariharan said that he will show that the appellant's alibi was rejected on a wrong reading of the mobile tower. "I will also argue on age of victim and that witness was not of sterling quality," he added. The court thereafter adjourned the matter, however it laid down a time table for expeditious hearing of the case. The court said that it shall given 2 hours each to Hariharan and CBI for making opening submissions and 1 hour each for rejoinder.The matter is now posted for hearing from July 6-8, 2026 in the post lunch session. Sengar was convicted for rape and kinapping (Sections 376/363/366 IPC) read with Sections 5(c)/6 POCSO by sessions court in its judgment dated 16.12.2019. He was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment on 20.12.2019 for the remainder of life, along with a fine of Rs. 25,00,000 and an additional compensation of Rs. 10,00,000 payable to the mother of the survivor. Against theJudgment as well as the Order on sentence, Sengar approached the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2020. For context, Sengar's sentence was suspended and he was granted bail by a coordinate bench on December 23, 2025. However, the Supreme Court had stayed the order on December 29, 2025.Thereafter on May 15 the Supreme Court set aside the December 23, 2025 order of the Delhi High Court suspending the life sentence of former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the Unnao rape case, and remitted the matter to the High Court for a fresh decision.For context, while suspending Sengar's sentence, the Court had primarily held that the offence under Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act was not made out against him.It held that, at a prima facie stage, the offence did not qualify as aggravated penetrative sexual assault under Section 5 of the Act.The High Court had ruled that the appellant, Sengar, could not be categorised as a “public servant” for the purposes of Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act or Section 376(2)(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The trial court had earlier convicted Sengar for...

'Aggravated Penalty Given Despite Not Being Public Servant': Kuldeep Sengar Opposes Unnao Rape Conviction, Life Term Before Delhi High Court

Malavika Prasad

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Malavika Prasad

'Aggravated Penalty Given Despite Not Being Public Servant': Kuldeep Sengar Opposes Unnao Rape Conviction, Life Term Before Delhi High Court

Malavika Prasad

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Malavika Prasad

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers