Gujarat High Court Rejects Asaram Bapu's Plea For Suspension Of Life Sentence In Rape Case, Says Challenge To Conviction Will Be Heard In Appeal
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday rejected Asaram Bapu's application for suspension of sentence, who was convicted by a sessions court last year in a 2013 rape case and sentenced to life imprisonment. After perusing through the sessions court judgment and "cursorily scanning" the evidence adduced before the trial court a division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice Vimal K Vyas in...
The Gujarat High Court on Thursday rejected Asaram Bapu's application for suspension of sentence, who was convicted by a sessions court last year in a 2013 rape case and sentenced to life imprisonment.
After perusing through the sessions court judgment and "cursorily scanning" the evidence adduced before the trial court a division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice Vimal K Vyas in its 50-page order said, "We do not find at this stage any patent infirmity in the order of conviction and it cannot be said that the order prima-facie on face of it erroneous and something palpable wrong. In a matter of conviction appeal, there always be some arguable points but that by itself cannot be a ground to held that the conviction may not be sustainable at the stage of deciding the prayer of suspension of sentence". The application was filed in Asaram Bapu's appeal challenging the session court's order of conviction in the case.
Grounds challenging conviction order to be considered at final hearing of appeal
The bench said that the "grounds" raised by the applicant challenging the order of conviction, particularly about a "false case being registered against the applicant, the delay in lodging the FIR and inter-se rivalry of the devotees and other grounds like conspiracy etc.," are required to be considered at the time of final hearing of the Appeal moved by the applicant (Asaram Bapu).
The bench said that at this stage it does not agree with the contentions of the applicant's counsel as ultimately, at the time of the final hearing, the evidence will have to be "evaluated and weighed"; at this stage, the court said, if it discusses/deals with all the grounds then it "may cause prejudice either of the parties". Therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the court said that it has confined itself to not discussing and examining the "grounds on merits".
The bench further rejected the applicant's contention on a "possible delay and disposal" of his appeal as well as his "age" and medical condition, observing that "in the facts of the present case, we do not found it relevant or material to grant relief of suspension of sentence".
On Rajasthan High Court's rejection of Asaram's suspension of sentence plea
The high court noted that the applicant is presently in the Jodhpur jail, and has been convicted and sentenced by a court in Rajasthan "for act of rape and sexual abuse of minor". The high court said that the applicant's appeal against conviction in that matter is pending before the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur.
"The fourth successive application of suspension arised from the conviction rendered by the Jodhpur Court, was rejected in the month of January, 2024, in the said application, the age factor as well as medical grounds were being raised but considering the refusal on the part of the applicant, not to participate in the treatment advised by the AIMS Hospital, Jodhpur and despite of consent on the part of the State to administered the medical treatment at Madhavbaug Hospital, Maharashtra, the applicant by way of affidavit, disclosed his intention not to undergo treatment with Madhavbaug hospital and insisted, to undergo treatment on his own," the order notes.
The high court said that the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur while rejecting the applicant's suspension of sentence application had observed that, if he is permitted to take treatment on his own, then, "there will be an issue of law and order".
The bench said that the applicant's medical issue has been taken care of by the jail authority at Jodhpur and recently on this ground, he had been granted parole also by the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur.
On incidents of attacks on witnesses
The bench further took note of "attacks on various witnesses and relatives of victims" in connection with various instances and cases alleged against the applicant in Gujarat and Rajasthan.
It however clarified that it is not the court's "intention to create an impression that the applicant and the ashram was responsible" for these incidents. However, the high court said, the fact remains that the incidents occurred wherein two witnesses had lost their lives some of them were seriously injured.
Possible delay in deciding appeal, 10-year time spent in jail not relevant to decide suspension of sentence plea
After considering the totality of the circumstances, the bench said that the ground of possible delay in adjudication of the appeal, the applicant's medical ailment, as well as 10 years completion in jail, "may not be relevant" for considering the prayer of suspension.
In doing so the high court further referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Ash Mohammad Vs. Shivrajsinh @ Lalla Babu and another (2012), where the Supreme Court had observed that in such a situation it is the duty of the court to properly analyse the antecedents of the accused and it should be weighed on the "scale of collective cry and desire" of the society, as the societal concern has to be kept in view in juxtaposition of individual liberty and societal concern deserves to be given priority over lifting the restrictions over the liberty of the accused.
"Thus, therefore, we do not find any exceptional ground to extend the benefit as prayed by the applicant –accused and for the reasons recorded above, no case is made out for suspending the substantial sentence and grant of bail," the high court said. It however added that the observations were "prima facie" in nature and were confined to the adjudication of the issue raised in the application.
Background:
On January 31, 2023, a sessions court found Asaram Bapu guilty of raping his female disciple multiple times at his ashram and convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He was convicted under IPC Sections 376(rape), 377(unnatural offences), Sections 342 (wrongful confinement), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 357(Assault or criminal force in an attempt wrongfully to confine a person) and 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty).
Among the various arguments raised Asaram's counsel had said that the entire case of the prosecution appeared to be fake, fabricated, concocted and got up and the story put forth by the victim seems to be improbable and in any circumstances it cannot be accepted. It was alleged that the victim was telling lies with oblique motives and she was instrumental of the larger conspiracy hatched by the persons who either removed from the ashram activities or left the ashram to extort money from the applicant and ashram.
It was argued that the trial court while evaluating the entire evidence of the prosecution case, did not properly deal with the issue raised by the defence and did not consider the omissions, contradictions and improvements made by the victim in her testimony. It was further argued that the trial Court committed an error while accepting the explanation for a delay of 12 years in lodging the complaint by the victim. It was further argued that the delay in lodging the FIR for about 12 years was also not properly investigated by the police.
It was also argued that the appeal against conviction was filed in 2023 and it is not likely to be heard and disposed of in a reasonable time, therefore, if the applicant is ultimately found to be innocent, then who will compensate the precious years of his life which he has spent in the jail.
Arguments were also made on the medical condition of the applicant and the court was told the applicant who has been convicted by a court in Rajasthan in another rape case, was recently granted "emergency parole" of seven days by Rajasthan High Court on August 13 for the treatment of the applicant's heart ailment.
On the other hand, the prosecution said that the applicant's sentence should not be suspended merely on the ground that his appeal is not likely to be heard in a reasonable time. With respect to health issues, it was submitted that the applicant refused to take proper treatment from the AIMS, Jodhpur Hospital.
It was also argued that the applicant failed to get his sentence suspended by the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur wherein, which did not accept his medical grounds, in view of proper treatment administered by the AIMS hospital and refusal of the applicant get the treatment with police escorts on his own costs.
It was also argued that the accused assailing the judgment and order of conviction, cannot be examined at this stage, because, the re-appreciation of evidence while deciding the application of suspension of sentence is not permissible in law. The prosecution further said that various persons who were witnesses to the present case either have been seriously assaulted or killed.
Case Title: Ashumal @ Asharam v/s State of Gujarat
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 120