CBI challenges Kuldeep Singh Sengar's bail in Supreme Court, says High Court's finding wrong
New Delhi (The Uttam Hindu) : The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging the bail granted by the Delhi High Court to former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, convicted in the Unnao rape case.
In a petition challenging Kuldeep Sengar's bail, the CBI has stated that the High Court's conclusion that an MLA does not fall under the category of a "public servant" under Section 5 of the POCSO Act is incorrect. In the petition, the CBI states that the Delhi High Court erred in understanding the essence of the POCSO Act, a crucial law that provides protection against child sexual abuse. The court failed to consider the intent and spirit of the Act. According to the CBI, a proper and comprehensive reading of Section 5(c) of the POCSO Act clearly states that a public servant refers to anyone who misuses their power, position, authority, or position (whether political or otherwise).
Being a legislator (a position held by Kuldeep Sengar at the time of the crime) is also constitutional. This position carries with it power, but also public trust. This position carries with it a responsibility towards society and the state. Therefore, not recognizing Sengar as a "public servant" under the POCSO Act is wrong. The CBI has stated in its petition that if Sengar is released, it would pose a significant threat to the victim's safety. Sengar is a highly influential individual with wealth and muscle power. Even if granted bail, he could still harm the victim and her family.
The CBI stated that merely serving a long prison sentence for a serious crime like child sexual abuse does not entitle someone to bail. A decision to suspend a life sentence for someone sentenced to life imprisonment can only be granted if the court is prima facie satisfied that the accused is not guilty. According to the CBI, the High Court ignored Kuldeep Sengar's criminal history and the impact this decision could have on public confidence in the judicial system.