Delhi HC rejects Unnao rape survivor's plea for harsher punishment to Kuldeep Sengar in custodial death case

The Delhi High Court on Monday rejected an appeal filed by the Unnao rape survivor seeking enhancement of the sentence awarded to former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the case related to the custodial death of her father. He had sought the death penalty for Sengar.

A bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja observed that she failed to show "sufficient cause" for the condonation of delay of 1,945 days, news agency PTI reported.

Sengar was convicted in December 2019 for the rape of the minor victim as well as for the custodial death of the victim’s father. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in the rape case and sent to jail for 10 years in the custodial death case, the Bar and Bench reported.

On February 19, the court had issued notice to Sengar and other convicts on the survivor's plea seeking condonation of a delay of over 1940 days in filing the appeal against the 2020 trial court order on conviction and sentencing.

The bench ruled that the appeal against the trial court's 2020 decision to convict and sentence Kuldeep Sengar, his brother Jaideep Sengar and others in the case was filed after an "unexplained" delay of 1945 days.

Calling it a case of "deliberate inaction and negligence", the bench observed that the deceased's daughter was aware of the outcome and was "actively participating" in connected proceedings but "consciously chose not to avail the statutory remedy of appeal within the prescribed period of limitation" despite availability of legal advice from her advocate, PTI reported.

As per the report, the court added that entertaining a belated appeal, seeking enhancement of conviction and sentence, would seriously prejudice the rights of the accused as he would be exposed to the uncertainty of prolonged litigation and the possibility of aggravated penal consequences long after the trial concluded.

“The grounds urged in the application, namely financial constraints, issues relating to accommodation, alleged physical debilitation, and assertions of threats or harassment, do not inspire confidence at the stage of considering the application for condonation of delay,” the court observed, as per PTI.

"These grounds are vague in nature, unsupported by any documentary material, and do not disclose the period during which such circumstances prevailed. Mere assertions, without substantiation, cannot constitute 'sufficient cause'," the court added.

"The delay being gross, unexplained, and attributable to negligence, the application deserves to be dismissed. Since the application for condonation of delay is dismissed, consequently, the captioned appeal is also dismissed as barred by limitation," the court ruled.

The survivor's counsel, Mehmood Pracha, earlier argued that she was living under adverse conditions and it was a "miracle" that she was able to pursue other cases.

Kuldeep Sengar's counsel, advocate Kanhaiya Singhal, said the present case was an example of conscious inaction.

The Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI) counsel said the agency has accepted the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and left the present issue to the court.

The girl was allegedly kidnapped and raped by Sengar in 2017 when she was a minor.

On March 13, 2020, Kuldeep Sengar along with his brother Jaideep Sengar alias Atul Singh was sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment by the trial court, which also imposed a fine of ₹10 lakh, in the custodial death case of the rape survivor's father.

The girl's father was arrested at the alleged behest of the accused under the Arms Act and died in custody on April 9, 2018, owing to police brutality.

The trial court had said "no leniency" could be shown for killing a family's "sole bread earner".

The trial court, however, did not hold the accused guilty of murder under the IPC and awarded the maximum sentence of 10 years for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder to the convicts under Section 304 of the IPC after holding that there was no intention to kill.

The case was transferred to Delhi from the trial court in Uttar Pradesh on the directions of the Supreme Court on August 1, 2019.