The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notices to the CBI and convicted former BJP MLA from Uttar Pradesh, Kuldeep Singh Sengar, after the Unnao rape victim moved court, seeking recall of the order granting interim bail to Sengar for his daughter’s wedding. A division bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta sought their responses to the victim's plea and listed the matter for Friday. Sengar, an expelled BJP leader, was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court in December 2019 for raping the victim in 2017, when she was a minor. On January 16, a division bench of HC had granted him 15-day interim bail between January 27 and February 10 and directed him to report regularly at the Lucknow office of CBI during the release period. The court also asked him to furnish two sureties of Rs 1 lakh each. Appearing for the victim in HC on Wednesday, advocate Mehmood Pracha submitted that according to his client, apprehension has increased for her and her family’s safety after Sengar was granted bail. He submitted that Sengar is a very “influential person” and was able to “orchestrate the death” of her father when he was in jail. Pracha argued that an SHO was also convicted in the case along with Sengar in the case of the victim’s father's death. The CBI submitted that Sengar has to report to the agency's investigating officer, and not the local SHO. The victim's plea stated that the Uttar Pradesh government had filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court on November 16, 2022 highlighting the security risk to her and her family during Sengar's time in jail. “Hence, the security risk to the applicant (victim) upon enlargement of the appellant (Sengar), even for an interim period, poses a serious risk,” the plea stated. It stated that she has received information that Sengar is going to harm her and her family after being released from prison on interim bail. It said the victim's apprehension regarding safety has increased especially because Sengar, after his release on bail, “is permitted to use his mobile phone, and is likely to conspire with and influence his known persons in the administration in order to harass the applicant, and to create security risks”.C
