The Unnao rape case was never merely another case being. tried in an Indian court. It has become the moment of truth for the Indian conscience, and the unpleasant questions that the country is compelled to confront is this: Do our daughters matter only when we say so, and do they not matter when the powerful are accused?
A minor from Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, accused sitting MLA, Kuldeep Singh Sengar of rape in 2017. What could have happened is that an investigation, protection, and justice could have been ensured, but instead, there was silence, fear, threats, the death of her father in police custody under very fishy circumstances, and a road accident which led to the death of her aunts and left one person severely injured. All these incidents did not look like an accident but rather the undermining of accountability. What happened is not an incident, but rather the choking of the truth.
Meanwhile, India has reasons to celebrate initiatives such as “Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao.” The banners provide promises of dignity, daughters receive endorsements from leaders, and the phrases flow around with ease. However, the reality that came to the forefront due to the Unnao incident is the hypocrisy that exists beneath the facade. When the speaker is a daughter, the safeguarding mentality tends to vanish into the horizon.
The attempt at committing self-immolation by the survivor outside the Chief Minister’s residence was the last option that was left for her as the system was not on her side; it also showed how the system was deaf to concerns until the potential for the disaster to spill onto the streets became imminent.
But again, the faith of the people is rocked when the accused is granted bail on 23rd December, 2025. The discretion to suspend the lifetime sentence imposed on the accused by the Delhi High Court, and the act of pending the hearing of the appeal filed, is bound to resurrect old wounds that had long since healed, and the provision of bail is clearly an element of criminal procedure but not applicable to an accused, whose crime involves sexual assault on a minor, intimidation, and abuse of authority, where the law finds itself devoid of ethics, to the point that the accused finds it easier to get relief than the victim?
The constitutional guarantee leaves nothing for ambiguity. “The right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is not merely life, but life with dignity and without fear. Indeed, for a survivor living in continuous threat, fear itself is caused by constitutional injury. Equality before the law guaranteed by Article 14 is reduced to zero if “influence” is translated into procedural flexibility that is not available to all citizens.”
The criminal code itself has a deliberate voice. Under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, rape by a public servant or a person in abuse of a position of authority is labeled aggravated rape, for which a stiff punishment is prescribed, since the multiplier of exploitation is heightened by the abuse of authority. However, a restrictive interpretation was used to say that an MLA is not a “public servant” within the meaning of this clause, unless the offense had occurred in the course of the actual official duties of that position. This reduced the impact of political authority to a mere paper exercise, while leaving its effects in the delayed investigation, the subsequent custodial death, and subsequent threats of gun-wielding impunity in the ongoing presence of the accused in the community.
Institutional delays made problems worse. It took strong action from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to react to the mounting public outrage, petitioning the Supreme Court of India to appeal against the arrest on bail. Justice is served only when the obstruction is seen to be true.
Indeed, the political setup cannot be sidestepped. At the time of the crime, Sengar was a Member of the Legislative Assembly from the same ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party, the same party that has ‘Beti Bachao Beti Padhao’ as a hallmark of their moral agenda. Hesitation at the point of distancing oneself has rendered a gap between the moral agenda and its implementation. Political parties cannot deliver judgments, but they are the guardians of trust, and there are consequences for silence and hesitation.
The heaviest toll, however, was exacted on the survivor herself. It took her strength to force her country to acknowledge its hypocrisy, but at what cost? She lost family members, imperiled safety, and, worst, her childhood was ruined by fear and courthouse hallways? Justice that comes with visibility, not instinct, comes with a hidden toll: with strength comes vulnerability.
Unnao could have been a turning point. However, it becomes a precedent, where Article 21 is limited to procedure alone, Article 14 is distilled into influence, and Section 376(2) is devoid of teeth because of judicial interpretation. Beti Bachao, if it is to mean anything, has to stand strongest against the stronger. Until then, the issue of Unnao, etched on to the conscience of a nation, shall continue to reverberate.
I would like to close this article with few lines from my side:
Tum beti ho iss dharti ki naari,
Sirf bachayi hui nahi, balki izzat ki adhikari.
Devi kehna aasaan hai sabke liye,
par nyay tabhi hai, jab kanoon le zimmedari.