CBI Urges Supreme Court to Overturn Sengar’s Bail, Citing Advani Precedent in Unnao Rape Case

New Delhi: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi High Court’s decision granting bail to Kuldeep Singh Sengar, the former MLA convicted in the Unnao rape case, by referencing a key Supreme Court ruling in the L K Advani matter.

In its plea, the CBI argues that the Delhi High Court wrongly concluded Sengar, who was an MLA at the time of the offense, did not qualify as a public servant under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, leading to the suspension of his life sentence.

Drawing on the Supreme Court’s judgment in the L K Advani v CBI case, where lawmakers were deemed public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the CBI contends that the same principle should apply to POCSO prosecutions. It asserts that legislators can face charges under anti-corruption laws as public authorities, so they should similarly be treated as public servants for aggravated offenses under the child protection statute.

The Delhi High Court had determined that Sengar’s actions did not fall under Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act, which addresses aggravated penetrative sexual assault committed by individuals in positions of authority, such as police officers, armed forces members, public servants, or institutional staff, warranting harsher penalties.

ALSO READ : Udaipur IT Firm CEO Allegedly Rapes Manager In Car, Read In Details

The CBI maintains that the high court overlooked the public trust and authority vested in a sitting MLA, which imposes greater responsibilities toward the state and society. It accuses the court of failing to interpret the POCSO Act purposively to fulfill its objectives of safeguarding children.

The agency emphasizes that POCSO violations under Section 5(c) carry even graver implications than corruption cases involving MPs or MLAs, justifying stringent penalties and enhanced accountability for those abusing positions of trust, whether political or otherwise.

Furthermore, the CBI argues that suspending a life sentence for a convict requires clear evidence that the conviction is prima facie unsustainable and likely to succeed on appeal. Mere prolonged incarceration or delays in appeal hearings should not automatically warrant relief in serious crimes, where courts must weigh individual rights against societal concerns and the offense’s severity.

A Supreme Court vacation bench is scheduled to hear the CBI’s petition on December 29.