A Supreme Court Hearing on the Bail of an Unnao Rape Convict

In the 2017 Unnao rape case, the Delhi High Court’s ruling suspending Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s life sentence and granting him bail was overturned by the Supreme Court on Monday. The topic of whether an elected legislator can be regarded as a “public servant” under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act has been brought up by the highest court’s action.

Following an appeal by the CBI, which deemed the High Court’s logic to be legally faulty, the Supreme Court intervened.

The Supreme Court’s 1997 ruling in the “LK Advani vs. CBI” case, which addressed accusations of corruption against prominent political personalities and established the legal standing of MPs and MLAs under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is a key component of the CBI’s argument.

The CBI told the Supreme Court that the reasoning used to challenge the High Court’s ruling was illegitimate.

In its petition, the CBI cited the Supreme Court’s 1997 judgment in the ‘LK Advani vs CBI’ case that arose out of corruption allegations involving prominent political figures, including Advani. The CBI had filed cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alleging that illegal funds had been paid to politicians in exchange for government favours.

A central legal issue in that case was whether elected representatives — MPs and MLAs — could be treated as “public servants” for the purposes of anti-corruption law. The Supreme Court answered that question in the affirmative, holding that elected public representatives fall squarely within the category of public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The CBI now contends that if lawmakers can be prosecuted as public servants for crimes like corruption, then instances involving sexual offenses against minors should be treated similarly, if not more so.

The agency claims that the High Court overlooked binding Supreme Court precedent and construed the POCSO Act too narrowly. It cautioned that the fundamental goal of the statute would be compromised if MLAs were not included in the definition of public officials under POCSO.

Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices JK Maheshwari and Augustine George Masih made comprised the Supreme Court’s vacation bench, which halted the Delhi High Court’s decision to award Sengar bail. The former BJP MLA was given four weeks by the court to reply to the CBI’s petition.

The case began in 2017 when a juvenile from the Unnao area accused Kuldeep Sengar, the Bangarmau constituency’s sitting MLA at the time, of raping her. Sengar was found guilty separately for the death of the survivor’s father while he was in detention. Sengar was ultimately given a life sentence by the trial court for the rape.

Sengar’s life sentence was halted earlier this week by the Delhi High Court, which also gave him bail while he appealed the lower court’s decision. Sengar’s standing as an MLA did not automatically qualify him as a “public servant” under the POCSO Act, according to the bench of Justices Subramonium Prasad and Harish Vaidyanathan.

The High Court ruled that MLAs are not specifically included in the term of “public servant” under POCSO. Based on this, it came to the conclusion that Sengar could not be held to what it called the more stringent standards that apply under POCSO for crimes committed by public employees or anyone in positions of authority.