The Kuldeep Singh Sengar's Case : Releasing a Rapist

The Kuldeep Singh Sengar's Case : Releasing A Rapist

Written by Vishal

It is good to write on something which others are discussing ; sometime, it helps me fight my own identity crisis and achieve success in attention-seeking. 

In a recent decision, Kuldeep Singh Sengar has been able to secure relief. His sentence has been suspended subject to certain conditions. The decision is given by a Division Bench.  Sengar was earlier convicted ; offences related to S.376/363/366 of IPC and S.5/6 of POCSO Act, 2012. Sengar took services of a Designated Senior Advocate [who is currently an office - bearer of DHCBA]. Case reference is Kuldeep Singh Sengar v. CBI [2025] GCtR 1891 (Delhi).

Few questions arise : whether justice system is averse to suspension of sentence ? Is it not true that Rahul Gandhi was convicted and then his sentence was suspended ? Sometime, there was even stay on Order of conviction to ensure the MP can continue to hold his position [Afzal Case ) ? 

Let us see Aasif @ Pasha v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1412 (SC) ; sentence suspension was denied by HC. SC said re-examine. 

Let us see Lilaben v. State of Gujarat [2025] GCtR 895 (SC). Suspension of sentence by HC ; SC says grant not proper. 

There is Omprakash Sahni v. Jai Shankar Chaudhary [2023] GCtR 2518 (SC) which examines scope of S.389 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Phrase used was "pretty long time". It works theoretically for accused but result-wise against the accused. 

There is Afjal Ansari v. State of UP [2023] GCtR 2416 (SC) ; the accused was a politician from a non-BJP party. HC has suspended the sentence ; SC went further and stayed the conviction. This is a 3-Judges' Bench finding and would definitely prevail over any other 2-Judges' Bench. Crime involved in Afjal's case was abhorrent.

Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and Others v. State of Gujarat [1999] GCtR 6550 (SC) stated that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed period of sentence and when he files an appeal under any statutory right, suspension of sentence should be considered by the Appellate Court liberally under certain circumstances.

 Conclusion

The rancour on Sengar's relief is playing hide and seek. Rahul was convicted ; Afjal was convicted ; both secured reliefs. While in Rahul's case sentence was lesser yet he is not behind bars. S.389 helped him ; Sengar is also a beneficiary of S.389. Public opinion can shape law but it should not obstruct the view of Courts. Let us admit that there are scores of acquittals in this country, recent being Surendra Koli v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1678 (SC) which shows how CBI functioned during 2006-2013. 

Update : SLP has been filed by CBI listed on 29/12/2025 and HC's order has been stayed. Victim had not filed any SLP till date. 3 Senior Advocates were there for accused. CBI had taken services of ASG. Next listed on 20 January 2026.