Kuldeep Singh Sengar. File. | Photo credit: PTI
The victim of the 2017 Unnao rape case in which former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar was convicted has approached the CBI to register an FIR against the then investigating officer for being “hand in glove” with the former lawmaker.
The woman also claimed that she and her family were facing threats from various quarters.
The development comes amid growing disappointment in several quarters after the Delhi High Court recently granted conditional bail to Sengar and stayed his life sentence in the case.
However, Sengar will remain in prison as he is also serving a 10-year sentence for the death of the rape survivor’s father.
In his complaint, the victim alleged that the investigating officer conducted the investigation dishonestly, with mala fides and in such a way that Senger and other accused can get the benefits of “willful misconduct and manipulation of established facts and secure a favorable outcome”.
She alleged that the officer used forged school documents in the charge sheet where she was listed as a student of a government school and her date of birth was also given differently, when in fact she never applied to that school.
The victim also alleged that the police officer said in the charge sheet that she was using the mobile phone of a woman named Heera Singh, even though she never used the phone.
She also claimed that several statements were falsely attributed to her in the indictment.
In a six-page complaint, the victim, who was a minor at the time of the rape in 2017, alleged that she had filed a complaint earlier but no action was taken against the police officer.
Citing the court’s order convicting Sengar, where the court questioned the recording of her statement by the investigating officer, she accused the police officer of being “hand-in-hand” with the accused to save them (Sengar and others) from prosecution.
The CBI challenged the Delhi trial court’s statement.
During the trial, the CBI said that the investigating officer’s claims about the mobile phone used by the victim were “mere opinion” and not “conclusive evidence” and on this basis alone “no presumption can be drawn that the police officer was siding with the accused party”.
“There is more to the story than meets the eye as it appears that the investigation was not conducted fairly and the approach of the IO/CBI leaves the impression that the recording of the girl’s statement was to discredit the version of the victim/survivor and her family members in this case,” the court said.
Published – 27 Dec 2025 21:15 IST
