The Delhi High Court has dismissed the application filed by former Uttar Pradesh MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar seeking suspension of sentence and release on bail during the pendency of his criminal appeal, holding that no exceptional or compelling circumstances were made out to grant such relief.
Senger was convicted by the trial court in March 2020 for offences including criminal conspiracy, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, fabrication of evidence and related offences, arising out of the assault on the father of a minor rape survivor, who later died while in judicial custody. The present application was moved under Section 389 CrPC.
Rejecting the plea, Justice Ravinder Dudeja reiterated that suspension of sentence after conviction is not a matter of right. The court held that once a conviction is recorded, the presumption of innocence no longer survives. The Court noted that the trial court had returned detailed findings holding Senger to be a central figure in the conspiracy, and such findings could not be lightly brushed aside at the stage of considering suspension of sentence.
The Court placed emphasis on the gravity of the offence and its societal impact, noting that the case was directly linked to the rape of a minor for which Senger had already been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life. “The existence of such serious antecedents is a significant consideration and militates strongly against suspension”, the court held. The Court also took note of the continuing threat perception to the victim and her family, observing that CRPF protection had been granted pursuant to Supreme Court directions and was still in force, which reflects the gravity of the threat perception
Addressing the argument of prolonged incarceration, the Court held that although the appellant had undergone a substantial portion of the sentence, the length of custody by itself could not be a decisive factor in cases involving serious offences. The Court further noted that a coordinate bench had already rejected a similar application in June 2024, and no change in circumstances, apart from the passage of time, had been shown to justify reconsideration.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the application for suspension of sentence, clarifying that its observations would not prejudice the merits of the pending criminal appeal.
Appearances
For the Appellant: Mr. Manish Vashisht, Senior Advocate, with assisting counselFor the CBI: Ms. Anubha Bhardwaj, Special Public ProsecutorFor the Victim: Mr. Mehmood Pracha, Advocate
