Unnao rape case: Delhi HC suspends jail term of Kuldeep Sengar

New Delhi/Unnao (UP), Dec 23 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Tuesday suspended the jail term of expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar, who is serving life imprisonment in the 2017 Unnao rape case, saying he has already served seven years and five months in prison.

Sengar's sentence has been suspended by the high court till the pendency of his appeal challenging his conviction and sentence in the rape case. He has challenged a December 2019 trial court verdict in the case.

He will, however, remain in jail since he is also serving 10 years' imprisonment in the custodial death case of the victim's father and has not been granted bail in that case.

Imposing several conditions, the bench of Delhi High Court Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar directed Sengar to furnish a personal bond of Rs 15 lakh with three sureties of the like amount.

It also directed him not to come within a five-km radius of the victim's residence in Delhi and not to threaten her or her mother. "Violation of any of the conditions would lead to cancellation of bail," the high court said.

About the victim's apprehension about danger to her life, the court said it expects that she will continue to get CRPF cover.

"At the same time, however, the argument of keeping the appellant (Sengar) in custody because of threat perception to the victim/ survivor, in the opinion of this court, is not a tenable argument to deny the benefit of section 389 CrPC to the appellant," the bench said in its 53-page verdict.

It added that courts cannot keep a person in custody over being apprehensive that security forces may not do their job properly. "Such an observation or such a thought process would undermine the laudable work of our police/paramilitary forces," the bench said.

It said the three sureties must be the residents of Delhi and also directed Sengar to stay in the national capital during the pendency of his appeal. He should remain available to complete the remaining part of the sentence if found guilty.

He was also asked by the high court to deposit his passport with the trial court and to report to the local police station every Monday at 10 am.

The high court listed his appeal before the roster bench on January 16, 2026, subject to orders of the chief justice.

The bench further said that letting Sengar be in jail when he has already spent about seven years and five months in prison would be violative of Article 21 (protection of life and liberty) of the Constitution.

About the safety of the victim, the court noted that the Supreme Court had transferred the trial from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi, keeping in mind her being vulnerable and her father having been killed, for which Sengar has been held guilty.

The court directed the deputy commissioner of police of the area where the victim is currently residing to personally ensure and supervise the protection given to the victim during the pendency of the appeal.

"The state is also providing for the accommodation of the victim. The Delhi Commission for Women is responsible for ensuring that the victim is provided sufficient accommodation and such arrangement is directed to be continued till further orders. In any way, the appeal is in this court, and it is always open for the victim to approach this court, if required," the bench said.

Sengar kidnapped the minor and raped her in 2017.

The rape case and other connected cases were transferred to Delhi from a trial court in Uttar Pradesh on the directions of the Supreme Court on August 1, 2019.

Sengar's appeal against his conviction in the case of the custodial death of the survivor's father is also pending, where he has sought suspension of sentence on the ground that he has already spent a substantial time in jail. He was sentenced to 10 years in jail in the custodial death case.

Talking to PTI, the Unnao case survivor said she was not satisfied with the verdict.

"I have small children. There is an elderly, differently-abled mother-in-law and my husband at home. The safety of my children is the biggest concern," she said.

The survivor alleged that during the course of the trial, her family was repeatedly forced to make rounds of the court and questioned why security cover provided to her family members, legal aides and witnesses was withdrawn.

"Usually, a verdict is pronounced within two or three days after the conclusion of arguments. But in this case, the decision came after three months. Even before the verdict, security for the family and witnesses was withdrawn," she alleged.

The survivor further said, "In the serious crime where my father was murdered and I was subjected to rape, the accused is granted bail after serving a few years in prison. This raises the question of what kind of justice this is." PTI SKV ABN SKV NSD NSD