Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Bail in 2013 Rape Case

-


Gujarat High Court Extends Asaram Bapu's Bail in 2013 Rape Case

By; Abhishek Jat, Advocate April 3, 2025

The Gujarat High Court has extended Asaram Bapu's temporary bail by three months on medical grounds in a significant ruling that highlights considerations for elderly prisoners with health concerns. Justice A.S. Supehia delivered the final verdict after a Division Bench comprising Justices Ilesh J. Vora and Sandeep N. Bhatt had earlier reached a split decision on the matter.

Case Background

Asaram, now 86 years old, was serving a life sentence under Sections 376(2)(c) and 377 of the Penal Code, 1860, having completed nearly 10 years of imprisonment. The Supreme Court had previously granted him temporary bail until March 31, 2025, on medical grounds with liberty to approach the High Court for extension if needed.

Medical Conditions Cited

The court noted Asaram's multiple health issues including:

  • Ischemic heart disease
  • Hypertension
  • Hypothyroidism
  • Anemia with GI bleed

Medical professionals had categorized him as a "high-risk patient" requiring specialized care, continuous monitoring, and multi-disciplinary treatment not available in prison.

Split Decision

In the initial hearing, Justice Ilesh J. Vora supported the bail extension based on Asaram's medical needs, while Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt dissented, observing that Asaram had not consistently pursued follow-up treatments during his bail period and had only approached an Ayurvedic Hospital on March 1, 2025, despite being granted bail on January 7, 2025.

Final Ruling

Justice A.S. Supehia, who adjudicated the case following the split verdict, determined that Asaram had established a genuine "need" for medical treatment. The court observed: "It cannot be said that an 86 years-old ailing person, who is desperate to get himself treated, can confine his treatment to a particular therapy or a particular system of medicines."

The court also noted that the State had neither disputed Asaram's medical condition nor provided evidence that he had misused his temporary freedom.

The bail extension comes with the same conditions previously imposed by the Supreme Court, including prohibitions on meeting followers in groups and requiring three police officials to remain in his vicinity without interfering with his medical treatment or lawful conduct.

[Asharam Thaumal Sindhi v. State of Gujarat, Criminal Misc. Application No. 1 of 2025 in CRA No. 607 of 2023, decided on March 28, 2025]

Location: Gujarat, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Clarifies Recovery of Maintenance Arrears Under CrPC: A Landmark Judgment

-
Image
  Supreme Court Clarifies Recovery of Maintenance Arrears Under CrPC: A Landmark Judgment By Abhishek Jat, Advocate In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has reinforced the enforcement mechanisms for the recovery of unpaid maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The Court clarified that arrears of maintenance can be recovered by treating them as a levy of fine under Section 421 of the CrPC, ensuring that defaulters cannot evade their financial obligations. This ruling is a significant step toward strengthening the legal framework for the protection of dependents, particularly spouses and children, who rely on maintenance for their livelihood. Background of the Case The case involved an appellant wife, Poongodi, and her minor son, who filed an application under Section 125 of the CrPC against the respondent husband, Thangavel, for maintenance. The trial court awarded maintenance of ₹300 per month, effective from February 4, 1993. ...
Read more

Supreme Court Clarifies "Readiness and Willingness" Requirement in Specific Performance Cases

-
Image
 Supreme Court Clarifies "Readiness and Willingness" Requirement in Specific Performance Cases Recent Judgment Sets Precedent on Acceptance of Earnest Money Refund By Abhishek Jat, Advocate In a significant ruling that reshapes the landscape of real estate contract enforcement, the Supreme Court of India has delivered a noteworthy judgment in Sangita Sinha v. Bhawana Bhardwaj and Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 4972 of 2025). The Court has clarified crucial aspects regarding the "readiness and willingness" requirement for specific performance of contracts and established that acceptance of refunded earnest money may render a specific performance claim untenable. Case Background The dispute originated from an unregistered Agreement to Sell executed on January 25, 2008, for a property in Patna valued at ₹25 lakhs. The buyer (respondent) had paid ₹2.51 lakhs in cash and issued three post-dated cheques of ₹2.5 lakhs each. Shortly thereafter, the seller alleged that her si...
Read more

Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Husband Accused Under Sections 376, 377 & 304 IPC: A Legal Analysis Author: Abhishek Jat, Advocate

-
Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Husband Accused Under Sections 376, 377 & 304 IPC: A Legal Analysis Author: Abhishek Jat, Advocate     Introduction The Chhattisgarh High Court recently delivered a crucial judgment in Gorakhnath Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh (CRA No. 891 of 2019), reaffirming the judicial interpretation of marital rape and unnatural offenses under Indian criminal jurisprudence. The Court held that a husband cannot be prosecuted under Section 376 (rape) or Section 377 (unnatural offenses) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for engaging in sexual intercourse, including unnatural sex, with his major wife, even in the absence of her consent. The ruling underscores the long-standing exception in Indian criminal law regarding marital rape and highlights judicial scrutiny over charges framed under Section 304 IPC. Background of the Case The appellant, Gorakhnath Sharma, was convicted by the trial court for offenses under Sections 376, 377,...
Read more