The Gujarat High Court on Thursday extended the temporary bail of self-styled godman Asaram Bapu until August 21, allowing him more time outside prison on medical grounds. Asaram, who is serving a life sentence for the rape of a minor in 2013, had approached the court for an extension despite previously stating he would not seek further relief.
The extension was granted by a division bench of Justice Ilesh J Vora and Justice PM Raval during the hearing of his pending criminal appeal against his conviction by a Gandhinagar sessions court.
This new request for bail extension follows a July 3 order, where the High Court had granted Asaram temporary bail for one month, based on his counsel’s assurance that no additional extension would be requested. At that time, the bench had clearly stated that further pleas on similar medical grounds would not be considered.
However, Asaram later moved the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s July 3 ruling. The apex court dismissed his plea on July 30, refusing to intervene but granted him the liberty to approach the High Court again if his health condition worsened. The Supreme Court noted that such an application should be considered swiftly by the High Court if filed.
During Thursday’s proceedings, the High Court bench sought details regarding Asaram’s current medical status. The State’s counsel informed the court that he had experienced a cardiac issue in July but emphasized the need for further verification from both hospitals treating him.
Although the State initially proposed an extension only until August 14, pending verification, the court decided to grant bail until August 21 to allow sufficient time for the submission of updated medical reports. “We will extend till the 21st. The petition won’t be disposed of yet. Let’s see the developments by then,” Justice Vora said while adjourning the matter.
Asaram Bapu, also known as Ashumal, remains behind bars following his conviction for sexually assaulting a minor girl. His continued temporary release is now being closely scrutinized, particularly in light of previous assurances made to the court against seeking additional extensions.
—Advocate Shivmani Yadav contributed to this article