"Merely Having Some Arguable Points In Conviction Appeal Not A Ground": Gujarat HC Rejects Asaram Bapu’s Plea Seeking Suspension Of Sentence In Rape Case
The Gujarat High Court has rejected the application filed by spiritual leader Asaram Bapu seeking suspension of sentence in rape case.
The Bench noted that in a matter of conviction appeal, there will always be some arguable points but that by itself cannot be a ground to hold that the conviction may not be sustainable at the stage of deciding the prayer of suspension of sentence.
The Court said that the various grounds raised are required to be considered at the time of final hearing of the appeal.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Ilesh J. Vora and Justice Vimal K. Vyas observed, “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”
Senior Advocate Yogesh Lakhani and Advocate Ashish Dagli appeared for the applicant while Senior Advocate Bharat Naik, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) R.C. Kodekar, APP L.B. Dabhi, and Advocate Ekant Ahuja appeared for the respondents.
Brief Facts -
The applicant Ashumal Sirumalani Harplani known by his devotees as ‘Asaram’ was working on the path of spirituality and built his first ashram in 1972 in Motera Area of Ahmedabad and gradually he established the ashrams in major cities of the Gujarat as well as across India and having thousands of followers and devotees. As per the prosecution case, the parents of the victim were devotees of the applicant – Asaram and used to visit his Surat Ashram. The victim and her other siblings from the childhood were often taken by their parents for darshan at the ashram at Surat. The family of the victim had blind faith in the applicant and his religious activities.
In these circumstances, the victim rendered her services as a Sevika and stayed in the ashram, Motera, Ahmedabad from 1997 to 2007. It was alleged that during the stay at Motera ashram, she was abused sexually and was illegally confined by the accused and the other accused persons were aided principal accused in commission of the alleged sexual activities. The other accused persons were acquitted from all charges by the Trial Court but the applicant was held guilty. He was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(C), 377, 354, 342, 357, and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Hence, he filed an appeal and application for suspension of sentence before the High Court.
The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case said, “We have cursorily scanned the evidence adduced before the trial Court and have perused the impugned judgment. 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.”
The Court refused to grant relief of suspension of sentence on the grounds of possible delay and disposal of appeal, age of the applicant, and his medical condition.
“The Bench of Jodhpur High Court while rejecting the application, also observed that, if the applicant is permitted to take treatment on his own, then, there will be an issue of law and order. In these circumstances, we are of the firm view that, the medical issue whatever has been taken care of by the jail authority, Jodhpur and recently, on this ground, he has been granted parole by the Jodhpur High Court”, it further noted.
The Court remarked that the ground of possible delay in appeal and medical ailment, as well as 10 years completion in jail, may not be relevant in considering the prayer of suspension.
“It is duty of the Court to properly analyse the antecedents of the accused and it should be weighed in scale of collective cry and desire of the society, as the societal concerned has to be kept in view in juxtaposition of individual liberty and societal concern deserve to be given priority over lifting the restrictions over the liberty of the accused”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court rejected the application.
Cause Title- Ashumal @ Asharam v. State of Gujarat
