SUPREME COURT STAYS THE DELHI HIGH COURT VERDICT SAYING THAT SENGAR WILL HAVE TO BE IN JAIL

After the spate of angry protests by various women organisations including the victim of the Unnao rape case and her most aggrieved traumatised family against the suspension of the sentence and grant of bail by the Delhi High Court to the convicted MLA , the Supreme Court of India’s three judge bench comprising of the CJI Justice Surya Kant, justice J.K.Mahedhwari and justice AG Madih has stayed the high Court order thus giving a great rebuff to the culprit and subsequent relief to the aggrieved family.

According to the LIVE LAW.IN report in detail in its today’s order the three judge bench of Supreme Court said that we find that there are substantial questions
of law. Ordinarily, when a
convict / undertrial has been released on bail pursuant to TC/HC order, such order should not be stayed by this court without hearing such person. However, respondent is
convicted and sentenced in another case under s.304 Part 2 IPC and is in custody in that case. We stay operation of impugned
order in peculiar facts. Respondent shall not be released from custody pursuant to the
impugned order. Victim has a statutory right
to file separate SLP. She does not require Liberty from this Court.

If she requires free legal aid, SC Legal Service Committee shall provide free legal aid. She may fle her appeal through her own counsel also” ruled the honourable Supreme Court.

The Live Law report says that the Supreme Court bench was seized of two petitions , one submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigations and another by the advocates challenging the Delhi High Court order providing relief to the culprit Sengar.

The Solicitor general Tishar Mehta appearing for CBI has said that the Delhi High Court has wrongly considered that the POSCO act doesn’t apply on the MLA Sengar as he wasn’t a public servant.
He argued that offences under the POCSO Act are structured around the concept of penetrative sexual assault and aggravated penetrative sexual assault, and that aggravation arises when the
offender is in a position of dominance over the child.

Mehta submitted that the term “public servant” is not defined in the POCSO Act and therefore has to be understood contextually.
According Mehta for the purposes of
POCSO, a public servant would mean a
person who is in a dominant position with
respect to the child, and misuse of that
position would attract the aggravated
offence provisions. He argued that Sengar, being a powerful MLA in the area at the relevant time, clearly exercised such dominance.

The Chief Justice asked whether the CBI’s case was that the concept of being a public servant becomes irrelevant once the victim is a minor. The Solicitor General responded that penetrative sexual assault on a child is itself an offence under POCSO, and that aggravation depends on the circumstances, such as abuse of dominance. He submitted that later amendments enhancing
punishment do not create new offences and
therefore do not violate Article 20 of the Constitution.

Senior Advocates Siddharth Dave and N Hariharan, appearing for Sengar, opposed the CBI’s submissions and argued that an MLA cannot be treated as a public servant for the purposes of aggravated offences under POCSO. They submitted that a penal statute cannot import definitions from another statute unless the law expressly
provides for it, and that the IPC contains its own scheme for defining public servants.They also contended that the charge framed and answered during trial was under
Section 376(1) IPC.

Justice Maheshwari pointed out that the
High Court had not examined the
applicability of Section 376(2)1) IPC, which was in force on the date of the offence and deals with rape of a minor. The Bench
observed that the legal issue concerning the
definition of “public servant” and its relevance under the POCSO framework requires determination.

Holding that questions of law arise for
consideration, the Court issued notice on the CBI’s petition, granted four weeks for filing a counter affidavit, and stayed the order passed by the Delhi High Court.
“Matter requires consideration. We are
inclined to stay the order. General principle is once someone has been released, person will be heard. But here, he continues to be in custody (in a separate case)”, the CII said reveals the LiveLaw.in report.

Meanwhile the daughter of MLA Sengar wrote a long letter to the authorities addressed to Hon’ble Authorities Republic of India as below which is self explanatory :

I am writing this letter as a daughter who is exhausted, frightened, and slowly losing faith, but still holding on to hope because there is nowhere else left to go.

For eight years, my family and I have waited. Quietly. Patiently. Believing that if we did everything “the right way,” the truth would eventually speak for itself. We trusted the law. We trusted the Constitution. We trusted that justice in this country does not depend on noise, hashtags, or public anger.

Today, I write because that faith is breaking.

Before my words are even heard, my identity is reduced to a label—“the daughter of a BJP MLA.” As if that erases my humanity. As if that alone makes me undeserving of fairness, dignity, or even the right to speak. People who have never met me, never read a single document, never looked at a single court record, have decided that my life has no value.

Over these years, I have been told countless times on social media that I should be raped, killed, or punished simply for existing. This hatred is not abstract. It is daily. It is relentless. And it breaks something inside you when you realise that so many people believe you do not even deserve to live.

We chose silence not because we were powerful, but because we believed in institutions. We did not hold protests. We did not shout on television debates. We did not burn effigies or trend hashtags. We waited because we believed that truth does not need spectacle.

What did that silence cost us?

We have been stripped of our dignity piece by piece. We have been abused, mocked, and dehumanised every single day for eight years. We have been drained financially, emotionally, and physically running from one office to another, writing letters, making calls, begging to be heard. There is no door we did not knock on. No authority we did not approach. No media house we did not write to.

And yet no one listened.

Not because the facts were weak.
Not because the evidence was lacking.
But because our truth was inconvenient.

People call us “powerful.” I ask you what kind of power leaves a family voiceless for eight years? What kind of power means watching your name dragged through mud daily while you sit silently, trusting a system that seems unwilling to even acknowledge your existence?

What scares me today is not just injustice, it is fear. A fear deliberately manufactured. A fear so loud that judges, journalists, institutions, and ordinary citizens are all pressured into silence. A fear designed to ensure that no one dares to stand with us, no one dares to listen to us, and no one dares to say, “Let us look at the facts.”

Watching this unfold has shaken me deeply. If truth can be drowned so easily by outrage and misinformation, where does someone like me go? If pressure and public frenzy begin to overshadow evidence and due process, what protection does an ordinary citizen truly have?

I am not writing this letter to threaten anyone.
I am not writing this letter to gain sympathy.
I am writing because I am terrified and because I still believe someone, somewhere, will care enough to listen.

We are not asking for favour.
We are not asking for protection because of who we are.

We are asking for justice because we are human.

Please let the law speak without fear.
Please let evidence be examined without pressure.
Please let truth be treated as truth even when it is unpopular.

I am a daughter who still believes in this country.
Please do not make me regret that faith.

Respectfully,
A daughter still waiting for justice
#Unnao #KuldeepSengar @LiveLawIndia @barandbench @ANI