Unnao rape case: No relief for Kuldeep Singh Sengar as Supreme Court refuses to suspend sentence

However, the apex court directed the Delhi High Court to hear his pending criminal appeal on an out-of-turn basis.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain a plea by former UP BJP MLA and dismissed BJP leader Kuldeep Sengar for suspension of the sentence in a case related to custodial death of Unnao rape victim's father, but directed the Delhi High Court to hear his pending criminal appeal on an out-of-turn basis.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria pointed out, even Mumbai terror attack case convict Ajmal Kasab, who brutally attacked on the sovereignty of this country, was even provided "fair trial".

Sengar challenged the Delhi High Court's order passed on January 19 refusing to suspend his sentence in the death case. 

Senior advocate Siddharth Dave for Sengar submitted that his client has already served seven years and six months of actual sentence out of the ten-year sentence.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, for the CBI, said that the main appeal against the conviction is listed for hearing on February 11.

Dave contended that in cases of term sentence, suspension of the sentence during the pendency of the appeal is the norm. 

However, the bench said that Sengar was serving life sentence in the other case related to the rape of the Unnao girl.

The court also said it was highly debatable that an offence involving moral turpitude of such a nature, one would be entitled to claim any remission.

Dave contended the remission was even available in murder cases but after 14 years of imprisonment. 

The bench, however, said it will ask the high court to take up the appeal on a day-to-day basis.

The court pointed out that the 2020 appeal might not ordinarily come as per turn in the Delhi high court and because "you have not been granted bail", the High Court has accorded Sengar out of turn hearing.

Mehta said he is undergoing life imprisonment in the second offence. 

"As an accused. This is one country which is so proud of the rule of law. This country has followed the rule of law, this country has provided a fair trial even to terrorists," the bench said.

Mehta said that Ajmal Kasab was a terrorist. 

The bench said that Kasab who came here and brutally attacked the sovereignty of this country.

"We even provided fair trial to him," the court said. 

Dave objected to the mentioning of Kasab's matter. The court said Mehta was only giving an illustration.

The bench emphasised that Sengar was entitled to a dispassionate hearing of his appeal by the high court, which will be decided without being influenced by external factors and should be strictly confined to the evidence on record.

The bench also expressed disapproval of the victim's counsel giving media statements about the case. 

"We are also aware of the media trial going on in this case, which we don't approve of. You have no business to go to the media if you are engaged as counsel, as CJI, I can't tolerate all these things," CJI told the counsel.

The apex court asked the high court to take up the matter on a day-to-day basis and decide it expeditiously, preferably within three months.

The court said that if an appeal filed by the victim seeking enhancement of sentence was pending, the high court may consider hearing both matters together.