‘If I had died like Nirbhaya, they would have believed me’: Unnao survivor welcomes SC verdict against Kuldeep Sengar

NEW DELHI: The Unnao rape survivor on Monday expressed relief after the Supreme Court of India rejected the bail plea of expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar in connection with the custodial death of her father.

Speaking to ANI, she said, "I went to the Supreme Court today. I was in the court when the judge gave his verdict. I am very happy with this verdict. I am satisfied that the judge has ordered the hearing to be completed within 3 months, as soon as possible. My father is not going to come back. His brothers, Atul Singh Sengar and Jaideep Singh Sengar, killed my father. They are out of jail for medical treatment. All the police officers who were involved are out. As far as Kuldeep Singh Sengar is concerned, he has committed a heinous act against me. He has raped me. How can I prove it? Am I alive? Do I have to do this?"




The Unnao rape survivor said she has been fighting for eight years to prove the assault, adding that if she had died like Nirbhaya, her ordeal would have been taken seriously. She urged the Supreme Court to ensure justice for her father, calling for the death penalty for Kuldeep Singh Sengar so that her father’s soul may rest in peace.

"If I had died like Nirbhaya, everyone would have believed that I was raped. I am alive. It took years to prove what happened to me. I have been struggling for 8 years. Even now, I have to prove that I have been raped. His daughter said that it was a normal accident. I did not know whether the accident was normal. I was on the ventilator. I have requested that the Supreme Court deliver justice for my father. He should be hanged so that my father's soul can be at peace and justice can be given to him," she said.

Earlier, the Supreme Court declined to grant immediate relief to rape-convict and former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, rejecting his plea for suspension of sentence and bail in the custodial-death case of the rape survivor’s father. The court, however, directed the Delhi High Court to hear and decide the matter within three months.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant asked the High Court to take up the case expeditiously, observing: "We deem it a fit case to request the High Court to hear the appeal and decide the same, but not later than three months."

Sengar had approached the Supreme Court challenging the January 19, 2026, order of the Delhi High Court declining suspension of sentence and consequential release on bail in the custodial-death case. The challenge arises from his conviction, by a March 4, 2020 judgment, under Sections 166, 167, 193, 201, and 203, read with Section 120-B of the IPC, for which he was sentenced to a maximum of 10 years' rigorous imprisonment, with separate sentences for individual offences.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave, representing Sengar, argued that the appellant had already served over seven years and six months in actual incarceration, and that continued denial of bail was unjustified given the delays in the hearing. The Court, however, observed that the criminal appeal is scheduled for final hearing before the High Court on February 11, making the plea for suspension of sentence largely academic.

Opposing the plea, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the CBI, highlighted that Sengar is already serving a life sentence in a separate rape conviction and that no exceptional or compelling circumstances exist to justify granting him bail.

"In cases of conviction, the normal rule is that the appeal should be heard before completion of sentence," the CJI said, adding that the victim's right to pursue her own appeal could not be curtailed.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that courts are generally cautious in granting bail to accused individuals with serious criminal antecedents, especially in cases involving custodial death, where a police officer has already been convicted.

(The victim's identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme court directives on cases related to sexual assault)

(With agency inputs)