Supreme Court seeks Unnao rape survivor reply on Centre’s plea to remove CRPF security cover

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted a last opportunity to the Unnao rape survivor to respond to the Centre’s plea seeking to remove the CRPF security cover given to her and others.

A bench comprising Justices Bela M Trivedi and Prasanna B Varale, hearing a suo motu case, when the Centre said the rape survivor and her family members did not require the security cover.

“Last opportunity is granted to her to file the response to the application. List it for hearing on March 25,” the bench said.

Advocate Mehmood Pracha, who previously represented the survivor said he did not need the CRPF security cover.

The bench was irked when another lawyer appeared in court on behalf of the rape survivor and sought time to respond to the Centre's plea.

Advocate Rajat Nair, appearing for the Centre, said the trial in the cases were transferred to the national capital and the survivor and her family members were not in Delhi .

A threat assessment report indicated they did not need the CRPF security cover, he said.

Expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar is serving a life term in jail for raping the minor girl in Uttar Pradesh's Unnao in 2017.

The top court on August 1, 2019 directed the rape survivor, her mother, other members of the family and their lawyer to be provided security by the CRPF.

All five cases registered in connection with the rape incident were transferred by the apex court from Lucknow to Delhi with the directions to a designated special court to hold daily trial and complete it within 45 days.

The apex court also directed the Uttar Pradesh government to provide Rs 25 lakh interim compensation to the survivor.

Sengar's appeal challenging the trial court's verdict in the Unnao rape case is pending in the Delhi High Court. He has sought the quashing of the trial court's December 2019 judgment that sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of his life.

On March 13, 2020, Sengar was also sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment in the custodial death case of the survivor's father.

The father was arrested in a case under the Arms Act and died in custody on April 9, 2018.

The trial court, which did not find the accused guilty of murder, awarded the maximum sentence for the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder to the convicts under Section 304 of IPC after holding that there was no intention to kill.