The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Delhi High Court order that had suspended the life sentence of expelled BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the Unnao rape case. The court said the issue involves important legal questions, especially the meaning of a public servant under the POCSO Act.

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices JK Maheshwari and Augustine George Masih, heard the plea filed by the CBI against the High Court order dated December 23.

CBI presses for immediate stay

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the CBI. Meanwhile, senior advocates Sidharth Dave and Hariharan represented Sengar.

Mehta described the matter as “a horrific case of rape of a child”. He pointed out that the trial court convicted Sengar under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act.

He further argued that the offence involved penetrative sexual assault. In addition, he stressed that Sengar held a position of power over the minor survivor.

“If a person is in a dominant position, it is considered an aggravated assault. In this case, he was a very powerful MLA of that area," Mehta told the bench. Therefore, he urged the court to “stay the impugned order". He added, “We’re answerable to the child."

Bench questions interpretation of law

As the hearing progressed, the bench questioned how courts should interpret the term public servant under the POCSO Act. Chief Justice Kant raised a serious concern.

“We are worried that a constable shall be a public servant under the act, but a member of the legislature will be excluded!" he said.

In response, Mehta explained that courts must read the provision in context. According to him, the law should treat anyone holding a dominant position at the time of the offence as a public servant.

He also clarified that amendments increasing punishment did not create a new offence. Instead, they aimed to strengthen protection for children.

Defence flags media trial concern

On the other hand, Sengar’s lawyers warned against what they called a media trial. They argued that courts cannot import definitions from other statutes into the POCSO Act.

However, the bench said the legal issue requires careful scrutiny. It observed, “Legal issue requires consideration and the judges of the High Court who passed this order are some of the finest judges. But we are all prone to committing errors!"

Justice Maheshwari then highlighted another gap. He said the High Court order did not clearly address Section 376(2)(i), which deals with sexual offences by public servants.

Top court halts High Court relief

After considering all arguments, the Supreme Court explained why it chose to intervene. The bench said, “We are conscious of the fact that when a convict or undertrial has been released, such orders are not ordinarily stayed without hearing such persons."

However, it added, “But in view of peculiar facts where the convict is convicted for a separate offence, we stay the operation of the Delhi High Court order dated December 23, 2025. The respondent shall not be released pursuant to the said order."

Accordingly, the court issued notice and asked parties to file counter-affidavits within four weeks.

Sengar remains behind bars

Earlier, the Delhi High Court had suspended Sengar’s life sentence after noting that he had served over seven years and five months in jail. It also imposed conditions, including a personal bond of Rs 15 lakh and restrictions on approaching the survivor.

However, Sengar continues to remain in prison. He is serving a separate sentence in the custodial death case of the survivor’s father.

Meanwhile, appeals in both cases remain pending before the courts.