Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Asaram Bapu's Medical Emergency Petition

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a petition from Asaram Bapu, who is currently incarcerated, regarding a medical emergency involving severe internal bleeding. His lawyer has requested an expedited hearing due to the critical nature of his condition. Asaram, serving a sentence for a rape conviction, is seeking relief from the court. The case has drawn significant attention due to the serious allegations against him, and the Supreme Court is set to evaluate the merits of his petition on July 17. This follows a previous ruling by the Rajasthan High Court that partially upheld his conviction in a sexual assault case involving a minor.
 | 
gyanhigyan

Supreme Court's Decision on Asaram Bapu's Petition

The Supreme Court has consented to an immediate hearing regarding the petition filed by Asaram Bapu, who is currently incarcerated and claims to be a divine figure. His attorney informed the court that Asaram recently experienced severe internal bleeding, necessitating his transfer to AIIMS Jodhpur in critical condition, where he required a blood transfusion. Senior lawyer D.S. Naidu presented this matter before the bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice P.B. Varale, requesting that it be prioritized for hearing based on medical grounds. Naidu highlighted that Asaram suffered from serious internal bleeding on July 8, leading to his hospitalization at AIIMS Jodhpur. He emphasized that Asaram is considered a 'high-risk' patient and required a blood transfusion after being admitted in a critical state.


Court's Response to Medical Emergency

In light of the medical emergency, the senior lawyer urged for an expedited hearing of the case. The Supreme Court responded by scheduling the petition for hearing on Friday, July 17. Asaram is currently serving a sentence for a rape conviction and has approached the Supreme Court seeking relief. The merits of his petition will be evaluated on the designated date. In June, Asaram appealed to the Supreme Court against a Rajasthan High Court decision made in May 2026. The High Court had partially upheld the appeals of Asaram and his co-accused in a sexual assault case involving a minor girl from 2013.


Details of the High Court Proceedings

The division bench of the Rajasthan High Court, which included Justices Arun Monga and Yogendra Kumar Purohit, delivered a verdict on the criminal appeals challenging the sentence imposed by the special POCSO court in Jodhpur in 2018. The bench acquitted co-accused Sharad and Shilpi of all charges but concluded that the evidence on record was sufficient to uphold Asaram's conviction for rape. Consequently, the bench did not alter the sentence handed down by the trial court. The court also directed Asaram to surrender before the authorities at Jodhpur Central Jail. This ruling came nearly eight years after the special POCSO court found Asaram guilty of sexually exploiting a minor girl and sentenced him to life imprisonment.


Background of the Case

The case garnered significant attention due to the serious allegations made by the victim against the prominent figure, Asaram. The prosecution's case was based on the claims of a minor girl who accused Asaram of sexual exploitation under the guise of spiritual healing and guidance. Following the filing of the FIR, investigators gathered medical evidence, witness statements, and other circumstantial evidence, leading to the filing of a chargesheet against the accused. After a thorough hearing, the special POCSO court convicted Asaram on April 25, 2018, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The trial court also found the co-accused guilty and imposed lengthy prison sentences on them. Dissatisfied with the verdict, the accused filed separate criminal appeals in the High Court. After concluding the final arguments, the division bench reserved its judgment on April 20. Upon reviewing the evidence and conclusions of the trial court, the High Court assessed the prosecution's case on a charge-by-charge basis. Partially accepting the appeals, the bench reiterated a fundamental principle of criminal law that each charge against the accused must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Applying this standard, the court found that the prosecution failed to conclusively establish the facts necessary to support the charges of gang rape under IPC Section 376D and certain serious offenses under the POCSO Act. Consequently, the accused were entitled to the benefit of the doubt regarding those charges. The court determined that the evidence on record did not sufficiently substantiate the gang rape allegations, leading to the annulment of the conviction under IPC Section 376D. The court also identified deficiencies in the evidence supporting some POCSO charges and intervened accordingly.