Kuldeep Singh Sengar, the former lawmaker convicted in the 2017 Unnao child rape case, was granted bail by the Delhi High Court on Tuesday, allowing him temporary release while his appeal is under review. The ruling has triggered widespread protests and condemnation across India.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has announced it will challenge the bail in the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition. Both the CBI and the survivor’s family had opposed Sengar’s release, citing security risks and submitting detailed legal arguments in court.
The survivor, a minor at the time, endured kidnapping and repeated sexual assault. Sengar was arrested after a directive from the Allahabad High Court, and the Supreme Court later transferred the trial to Delhi, instructing that it be completed within 45 days.
The Delhi High Court ruled that Sengar’s status as a Member of the Legislative Assembly at the time does not qualify him as a “public servant” under the Indian Penal Code. Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan said this excludes him from Section 5 of the POCSO Act, which mandates harsher penalties for sexual offences committed by authority figures.
Under Section 5 of the POCSO Act, sexual assault by someone in authority carries a minimum 20-year sentence. The court noted that Sengar’s seven years and five months already served exceed the minimum under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The trial court had previously sentenced him to life imprisonment, treating him as a public servant under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The bail decision has drawn sharp criticism from opposition leaders. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi questioned the ruling on X, asking if survivors are being punished for speaking out. “Bail for rapists and treating survivors like criminals—what kind of justice is this?” he wrote.
The survivor and her mother continue to protest the High Court’s decision. Meeting Gandhi for legal support, her mother told the Press Trust of India, “My tears will stop when his bail gets cancelled. Only then will my children eat food.”
The case has reignited debates over child protection laws and accountability for public officials in India, raising concern over the treatment of sexual assault survivors.
