By Rootsalert News Desk| 09-February-2026
Apex Court Asks Delhi High Court to Expedite Appeal and Decide Within 3 Months; Sengar Continues to Serve Sentence in High-Profile Unnao Rape-Related Matters
In a significant development in the long-drawn Unnao rape case, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant immediate bail or suspension of sentence to expelled BJP leader and former MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the custodial death case of the rape survivor’s father.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and NV Anjaria, declined to intervene directly but requested the Delhi High Court to take up Sengar’s pending appeal on an “out-of-turn” or priority basis. The top court directed the High Court to hear the matter expeditiously and deliver its decision within the next three months.
This order comes shortly after the Delhi High Court had earlier rejected Sengar’s plea for suspension of his 10-year sentence in the same case. Sengar has been in custody since April 2018 and has reportedly served over 7 years in this matter, though he is also serving a life sentence in the main Unnao rape conviction.
The case traces back to horrific events in 2017-2018. According to the prosecution, a minor girl was allegedly lured with a job promise and raped by Sengar at his residence on June 4, 2017. When the survivor’s family pursued justice and attended a court hearing in Unnao in April 2018, her father was publicly assaulted. He was arrested the next day on Arms Act charges and died in police custody on April 9, 2018, due to multiple injuries.
The incidents led to FIRs at Makhi police station in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, with trials shifted to Delhi’s Tis Hazari Courts under CBI investigation. Sengar was convicted and sentenced in both the rape case (life imprisonment) and the custodial death-related charges (10 years).
The Supreme Court’s latest directive emphasizes speedy justice while noting the gravity of the offences and Sengar’s ongoing life sentence in the related rape matter. Legal experts see this as a balanced approach, pushing for resolution without granting immediate relief.
Sengar’s legal team had argued for suspension citing prolonged incarceration, but the bench highlighted that such pleas in serious cases involving moral turpitude remain debatable, especially when the convict is already serving life imprisonment elsewhere.
The matter highlights ongoing scrutiny of high-profile cases involving political figures and the judiciary’s push for timely hearings in appeals.
