Read Time: 04 minutes
Sengar had received a life imprisonment sentence for the sexual assault of a minor girl in the Unnao District, Uttar Pradesh, in 2017. Additionally, he was convicted and sentenced to a 10-year prison term in connection with the custodial death of the father of the Unnao rape victim.
Kuldeep Singh Sengar, before the Delhi High Court, submitted that he has been incarcerated for eight and a half years and should be granted some relief. These observations were made in an appeal filed by Sengar seeking a suspension of sentence. The bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar scheduled the matter for April 28, 2025.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Hariharan submitted that the suspension application had been pending for a considerable period. He stated that while he had argued the appeal from his side, the arguments from the other side remained incomplete. He further emphasized that the appellant had already spent eight and a half years in custody.
The court suggested continuing the proceedings on Saturday. However, Senior Advocate Hariharan indicated that his submissions would not conclude within that timeframe. He asserted that he had already presented arguments regarding the suspension, stressing that the conviction was based on incorrect facts and a misinterpretation of telephone records.
Senior Advocate Hariharan further asserted that if he could demonstrate that the conviction was based on incorrect grounds, the court should consider granting a suspension of the sentence. He claimed that the prosecutrix was not a minor and that he could establish an alibi. Additionally, he alleged that there had been a misinterpretation of reports and maintained that his client should not remain incarcerated for such a prolonged period.
Background:
Previously, the court considered Kuldeep Singh Senger’s application for interim bail. His legal counsel highlighted delays in his release despite a temporary suspension of his sentence. The advocate informed the court that the delay was due to his conviction in another case under POCSO and other statutes.
The court, in June 2024, denied an appeal seeking suspension of his sentence, emphasizing that “once an accused is convicted, the presumption of innocence is no longer applicable”.
Case Title: Kuldeep Singh Sengar v CBI (CRL.A.-53/2020)
Please Login or Register
