New Delhi [India], July 7 : The Delhi High Court heard the arguements on the final appeal filed by former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the Unnao Rape case, who disputed the age of the victim. His counsel cited different age proofs showing different dates of birth.
Division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Vikas Mahajan heard the arguements advanced by the senior advocate on behalf of Kuldeep Singh Sengar.
Senior counsel N Hariharan alongwith Advocate SPM Tripathi and Siddharth Yadav, appeared for Sengar and argued that there is no substantial proof of age and there are as many as four age proofs showing different dates of birth. Some certificates show her age as a minor, whereas some show her major in July 2017.
The trial court overlooked this fact and relied on a school certificate issued by a private school. Though the society of the school was registered at a later stage, the senior advocate said, adding that the proof of age issued by the private school was not a reliable one. However, the trial court overlooked this aspect.
Senior counsel Hariharan also referred to medical evidence of age determination. He referred to four bone ossification test reports. The first one was done at Unnao, the second one was done at RML Lucknow, the third one was done by a joint panel at RML Lucknow, and the fourth test was done at AIIMS Delhi. He questioned which report was to be relied upon.
On July 6, it was argued by the senior counsel that it is a case where the judgement was delivered in 19 days. He said that justice hurried is justice buried. He also said that Sengar was convicted of an offence for which he was not charged. He was charged for the offence under section 376 (1) IPC and the POCSO Act, whereas he was convicted for the offence under section 376 (2) IPC, which prescribed punishment for a public servant.
Advocate Mehmood Pracha appeared for the victim.
On May 26, it was argued that Sengar was an MLA from Bangarmau; however, the incident was reported from Makhi Police Station of Unnao, UP. Though he was not an MLA from that area.
Senior counsel had also argued that though the co-accused Shashi Singh was acquitted from this case, Sengar was also convicted for the offence of criminal Conspiracy. How could he be convicted of the offence of criminal conspiracy once the co-accused is acquitted in this case, the advocate asked.
Sengar was convicted and sentenced by the District Judge Dharmesh Sharma in 2018. He was also convicted and sentenced to 10 years Imprisonment alongwith others in the Unnao Custodial death case. Both appeals are pending before the Delhi High Court.
This case was transferred to Delhi from Uttar Pradesh on a direction passed by the Supreme Court.
Recently, the Supreme Court has passed a direction for the expeditious disposal of an appeal pending before the Delhi High Court.