New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court of India to challenge a controversial order passed by the Delhi High Court, which suspended the life sentence of former Uttar Pradesh MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar and granted him bail in the 2017 Unnao rape case.
The Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the premier investigating agency assails the High Court’s decision dated December 23, 2025, to release Sengar while his appeal against his conviction is still pending. The CBI has contended that the High Court’s ruling is "legally unsustainable" and risks diluting the protective framework of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act
The legal crux of the CBI’s challenge lies in a technical interpretation of the term "public servant." While granting bail, the Delhi High Court had prima facie observed that Sengar could not be categorized as a “public servant” within the meaning of Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act and Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act deals with "aggravated penetrative sexual assault" committed by a public servant. Offences under this section carry a much more stringent punishment—a minimum of 20 years in jail, extending to life imprisonment for the remainder of the convict's natural life.
The High Court reasoned that since the POCSO Act does not independently define a "public servant," it must rely on the definition provided in the IPC. Following a narrow interpretation, the Court suggested that an MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly) does not fall under the specific categories of public servants listed in Section 21 of the IPC. Consequently, the Court held that the "aggravated" provisions might not apply to Sengar, leading it to suspend his sentence.
In its petition to the Supreme Court, the CBI has taken strong exception to this reasoning. The agency argued that the High Court adopted a "narrow and technical" interpretation that defeats the very objective of the POCSO Act.
Key grounds of the CBI's appeal include:
Object of the Statute: The CBI submitted that POCSO is a special welfare legislation designed to provide enhanced protection to children. The agency argued that any abuse of authority by an elected representative should be treated as an aggravating circumstance, rather than allowing them to escape through technical loopholes.
Gravity of the Offence: The plea emphasized that in cases involving the rape of a minor, the suspension of a life sentence should be a rare exception. The CBI pointed out that the Supreme Court has consistently held that for heinous crimes, long incarceration alone is not a sufficient ground for bail.
Threat to the Victim: The agency raised serious concerns regarding the safety of the survivor. Given Sengar's past conduct and the immense influence he wielded as a powerful legislator, the CBI argued that his release poses a real risk of witness intimidation and undermines public confidence in the criminal justice system.
Legal Precedents: The CBI cited various Supreme Court precedents (such as the P.V. Narasimha Rao case) which have, in different contexts like the Prevention of Corruption Act, recognized MPs and MLAs as public servants because they perform public duties.
The High Court’s order triggered immediate protests. On Tuesday evening, the Unnao rape survivor staged a protest at India Gate, expressing her fear and sense of betrayal. “If such a rape accused comes out, how will we be safe?” she asked, alleging that the timing of the bail was linked to upcoming political developments.