New Delhi: In a major setback for former Uttar Pradesh BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, the Supreme Court, on Monday, refused to suspend his 10-year sentence in a custodial-death case.
The top court directed the Delhi High Court to hear and decide his appeal within three months.
It was “highly debatable” whether a convict could seek remission in an offence involving serious moral turpitude, the bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice N V Anjaria said remarked while declining to suspend Sengar’s sentence.
The bench questioned Sengar’s plea for suspension of sentence and underscored that the gravity of the offence could weigh heavily against any claim for early release, as reported by Live Law.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Sengar, told the court that his client had completed over nine years of the 10-year term and that the appeal had been pending since 2020.
“Another five months and I would have undergone the entire sentence,” Dave submitted, stating that the appeal could become meaningless if not heard urgently.
Justice Bagchi, however, pointed out that Sengar was already serving a life sentence in another case and asked whether that was irrelevant to the present plea.
CJI Kant responded that the actual period undergone was “seven years something” and observed, “It is highly debatable whether you will be entitled to claim remission in such a case of moral turpitude.”
While the length of incarceration was a factor in deciding suspension of sentence, the main appeal was already listed and the court would request the High Court to hear it on a day-to-day basis, the CJI observed.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta stressed Sengar was serving a life term in the Unnao rape case, arguing that suspension of the custodial-death sentence would make little practical difference.
CJI Kant underlined India’s adherence to the rule of law, saying the country was proud of giving even the “most dreaded” accused a fair opportunity to defend themselves and assuring Sengar that whatever he was entitled to in law would be granted, strictly on the basis of evidence.
The bench also deprecated media comments made by the victim’s counsel, warning that such conduct would not be tolerated while proceedings were underway.
“You have no business to go to the media if you are engaging as counsel in this,” the CJI was quoted as saying.
The court, in its order, recorded that Sengar had been convicted in March 2020 for multiple offences and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of up to 10 years.
Earlier, the High Court had declined to suspend the sentence, noting that he was already undergoing life imprisonment in the rape case and that there were no exceptional circumstances warranting relief.
The Supreme Court accepted the prosecution’s submission that the appeal was shortly coming up for hearing ane requested the High Court to take up the matter within a week and conclude it within three months.
The bench also urged the High Court to hear any connected appeals, including those filed by the complainant on sentence, together, in the interest of justice.
Sengar has been in custody since April 2018 and is serving both the 10-year term in the custodial death matter and a life sentence in the minor rape case, which arose from FIRs registered in Unnao in 2018 and were later tried in Delhi.
