New Delhi, Dec 27, 2025: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has challenged the Delhi High Court’s decision to suspend the life sentence of former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) legislator Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the 2017 Unnao rape case, arguing that the high court erred in narrowly interpreting the term “public servant” under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The agency has approached the Supreme Court seeking urgent intervention to reverse the suspension and ensure that legislative intent in safeguarding vulnerable children is upheld.

Sengar, a former member of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly, was convicted by a trial court in December 2019for aggravated penetrative sexual assault of a minor under Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act, and sentenced to life imprisonment for the remainder of his life. He has served over seven years and five months in custody. However, on December 23, 2025, the Delhi High Court suspended his life sentence, stating that an MLA does not fall within the definition of a “public servant” under Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The high court further held that precedents under the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) treating legislators as public servants cannot automatically extend to offences under the POCSO Act.

CBI’s Appeal Against High Court Order

In its appeal, filed on Friday, the CBI contended that the high court’s decision narrowly construed the term “public servant”, ignoring the broader purpose of the law, which is to protect children from sexual abuse by individuals in positions of power and authority. The agency emphasised that legislators, by virtue of holding a constitutional office, are vested with public trust and authority over the electorate, and any abuse of such position, particularly against children, attracts enhanced punishment under the law.

“The offences under Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act involve a direct abuse of children by persons in positions of power, leading to severe physical, psychological, and moral harm,” the CBI noted in its appeal. The agency further highlighted that Section 5(c) of POCSO, Section 21 of the IPC, and Section 2(c) of the PC Act share a common legislative intent: imposing heightened accountability on individuals occupying positions of trust, authority, or public duty.

The CBI argued that the high court’s approach undermines the legislative objective of protecting vulnerable children from sexual exploitation by public functionaries. “A purposive and harmonious interpretation of these provisions ensures that MPs, MLAs, government officials, and other persons exercising public functions are treated as ‘public servants’ or ‘persons in authority’ wherever abuse of office or trust occurs. This reinforces accountability, discourages misuse of power, and safeguards victims,” the CBI submission said.

High Court’s Rationale

The Delhi High Court had ruled that the aggravated offence under Section 5(c) was not clearly made out at the stage of sentence suspension. While acknowledging Sengar’s long incarceration, the court noted that Section 5(p) of the POCSO Act—which addresses offences by persons in a position of trust or authority—was not explicitly applicable in his case according to the trial court’s findings. The high court concluded that the suspension of the life sentence was warranted given the period already served and the ongoing appeal against his conviction.

The court also indicated that at the stage of considering a suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), it would be inappropriate to delve into detailed arguments about whether Sengar, as an MLA, qualifies as a public servant under the POCSO Act.

CBI’s Counter-Argument

The CBI strongly disagreed with the high court’s limited interpretation, arguing that MPs and MLAs have consistently been treated as public servants in various Supreme Court rulings, including under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The agency highlighted that sexual offences under Section 5(c) of POCSO are far graver than corruption-related offences, as they involve direct, long-term harm to the victim and her family.

Further, the CBI emphasized that granting suspension for a life sentence should be considered only where the conviction appears prima facie unsustainable and there is a strong likelihood of success on appeal. “Mere long incarceration or delay in hearing the appeal cannot automatically justify suspension in heinous offences. Courts must balance individual liberty with societal interest and the gravity of the crime,” the agency noted.

The CBI also cautioned that Sengar’s release would pose a serious threat to the survivor and her family, underscoring the need to prioritize protection and safety in cases involving sexual abuse of children.

Legislative Intent and Public Accountability

In its appeal, the CBI drew attention to the deliberate legislative design behind enhanced penalties for public functionaries. By specifying stricter punishment for offences committed by persons in positions of trust or authority, lawmakers aimed to deter abuse of office and protect vulnerable victims. The CBI asserted that a “comprehensive and meaningful reading” of the POCSO Act leaves no doubt that the law intends to punish sexual exploitation committed by public servants, including elected representatives.

The agency also urged the Supreme Court to adopt a purposive and harmonious construction of the provisions, reinforcing that the abuse of political power to commit crimes against children must attract the most stringent punishment, consistent with both the spirit and letter of the law.

Background of the Case

The Unnao case came to national attention in 2017 when a minor girl accused Sengar of sexually assaulting her. Over the subsequent years, the survivor and her family faced immense challenges, including threats and intimidation, which intensified public scrutiny of the case. The trial court’s conviction in 2019 brought partial closure, sentencing Sengar to life imprisonment.

The high court’s suspension order, however, has revived public concern, prompting the CBI to seek intervention from the apex court. In its submission, the agency stressed that Sengar’s appeal against conviction is still pending, and that the suspension of sentence should not preempt the outcome of the main appeal.

Supreme Court Intervention Sought

The CBI’s plea to the Supreme Court requests a stay on the high court’s sentence suspension order. It underscores that public servants, particularly elected representatives, wield considerable authority, and that sexual offences committed by them carry far-reaching consequences. The agency emphasized that permitting suspension in such cases could set a dangerous precedent, weakening the deterrent effect of the law and compromising the safety of survivors.

By urging the apex court to adopt a holistic and purposive interpretation, the CBI aims to ensure that the legislative intent behind stringent provisions of the POCSO Act is fully realized. The agency’s position reinforces the principle that those in positions of trust or authority must be held accountable when they exploit their power, particularly in crimes against children.

Implications

The Supreme Court’s intervention in this matter could have far-reaching implications for how offences by public servants are treated under the POCSO Act. A ruling in favor of the CBI would reaffirm that MPs, MLAs, and other public functionaries are subject to enhanced liability for abusing their office, thereby strengthening the legal safeguards for children and vulnerable individuals.

Legal experts note that the case also underscores the importance of balancing individual liberty with societal interest, especially in cases of heinous crimes involving public officials. The decision could set a precedent for future casesinvolving sexual offences by persons in positions of authority, clarifying the scope of the term “public servant” across multiple statutes.

Conclusion

The CBI’s appeal highlights a fundamental tension between judicial interpretation and legislative intent. While the high court focused on procedural and definitional aspects, the agency argues for a broad, purposive approach that prioritizes the protection of minors and holds public servants accountable. The Supreme Court’s decision on this appeal will likely have a significant impact not only on the Unnao case but also on the broader application of the POCSO Act in India, especially regarding abuse of power by elected representatives.

The nation now awaits the apex court’s response to the CBI plea, as the issue strikes at the heart of child protection, accountability of public office bearers, and the enforcement of stringent laws to punish sexual offences.