Delhi High Court Suspends Life Sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar in Unnao Rape Case
Court Decision on Kuldeep Singh Sengar
On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court temporarily suspended the life sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar, a former member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, as he appeals his conviction related to the Unnao rape incident, according to reports.
A panel of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar also granted bail to Sengar. The court imposed restrictions, instructing him to avoid traveling within a five-kilometer radius of the victim's residence and to remain in Delhi while on bail.
As part of the bail conditions, Sengar was required to submit a personal bond of Rs 15 lakh along with three sureties of the same amount, and he must report to the police every Monday at 10 am.
In December 2019, Sengar was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment for the rape of a minor in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, which occurred in 2017.
Additionally, in March 2020, both Sengar and his brother Jaideep Singh Sengar received ten-year prison sentences for the murder of the victim's father while he was in judicial custody.
During the sentencing in 2019, the trial court mandated the Central Bureau of Investigation to take necessary measures to safeguard the complainant's life and liberty.
Following a Supreme Court directive in 2019, the woman and her family were placed under the protection of the Central Reserve Police Force due to threats against their lives, which included concerns for the complainant, her mother, and her lawyer.
This heightened security came after the complainant and her lawyer suffered serious injuries in a car accident, which her family alleged was orchestrated by Sengar. Tragically, two of her relatives, including a witness in the rape case, lost their lives.
In 2024, the government filed a petition to withdraw the CRPF security provided to the complainant and her family, arguing that they no longer required protection.
However, in March, the Supreme Court declined to lift the security measures for the complainant, citing ongoing safety concerns, although it did allow the revocation of security for her family members and other witnesses involved in the case.