Asaram Bapu, a self-proclaimed spiritual leader, faced significant opposition in his attempt to convert a 20-day parole granted by the Rajasthan High Court into temporary bail in Gujarat. The state argued that he did not provide sufficient “independent grounds” for his release. On Tuesday, the Gujarat High Court reviewed the case and ultimately denied his request.

During the proceedings, Justices Gita Gopi and L. S. Pirzada examined Asaram’s application, who is currently serving a life sentence following a conviction for rape in a 2013 case adjudicated by a Gandhinagar court. He sought temporary bail for 20 days, referencing a recent order from the Rajasthan High Court that allowed him parole in a separate rape matter.

Asaram’s legal representative contended that the Rajasthan High Court had approved the parole by considering his age and the fact that he had been incarcerated for over 13 years in that case. The counsel argued that the concerns raised by authorities regarding his release were unfounded and merely speculative. Following the issuance of that order, Asaram sought parole from the Gujarat authorities; however, his application was denied.

His attorney highlighted the inconsistency in the situation, stating, “This is the dichotomy. Therefore, I’m here for temporary bail.” He clarified that the request was not based on medical reasons, noting that Asaram was already receiving medical care as mandated by the Supreme Court.

The state firmly opposed the application, arguing that Asaram was asking the Gujarat High Court to exercise its discretion without establishing an independent basis for temporary bail. Public Prosecutor Hardik Dave stated, “He is requesting the court to use discretion based on an order from another court. However, the fundamental requirement for an independent ground for temporary bail appears to be absent.”

The state further asserted that Asaram had not disclosed the reasons for which he had applied for and received parole from the Rajasthan High Court. This information, they argued, was essential for the Gujarat High Court to consider exercising its discretionary powers.

Dave emphasized that if parole were granted without disclosing the grounds upon which it was based, it could lead to potential violations of subsequent orders from the Supreme Court. He argued that clarity regarding the reasons for the parole was critical for any subsequent judicial decisions.

Additionally, the state maintained that parole is not an entitlement, and in the absence of an independent basis for temporary bail, the court should refrain from exercising its discretionary powers.

The Gujarat High Court also acknowledged a Supreme Court order issued on August 6, shortly after the Rajasthan High Court’s parole decision on August 3. The Supreme Court had reviewed a report from AIIMS Jodhpur, which indicated that while Asaram did not require hospitalization, he needed continuous assistance from trained caregivers. Although the Supreme Court allowed him to choose a caregiver, it kept his application for sentence suspension pending, permitting him to return if his health condition worsened.

In its ruling on Tuesday, the Gujarat High Court stated that it found no justification to approve Asaram’s request at this time, suggesting that he could approach the Supreme Court should his health deteriorate. A detailed order from the court is anticipated.

Aditi Raja serves as an Assistant Editor at The Indian Express, based in Vadodara, Gujarat. With over two decades of experience, she has been reporting on Central Gujarat and the Narmada district since 2013, establishing her as a reputable source on regional political, administrative, and socio-economic matters.

Her expertise encompasses a thorough understanding of the intricate dynamics affecting Central Gujarat, which is home to a substantial tribal population. Aditi’s reporting covers various domains, including:

• Politics and Administration: Insightful analysis of the internal dynamics of political factions, the impact of national leaders’ visits, and government policies on local populations.
• Crucial Regional Projects: Coverage of the socio-economic and political implications of significant infrastructure projects, such as the Statue of Unity and the Sardar Sarovar Project.
• Social Justice and Human Rights: In-depth reporting on sensitive issues, including gender, crime, and tribal rights, alongside legal proceedings in district courts and the Gujarat High Court.
• Local Impact and Disaster Reporting: Documentation of the immediate effects of events on communities, including political and civic responses to disasters.
• Special Interest Beat: Investigation of issues affecting Non-Resident Gujaratis (NRIs), including legal challenges abroad and social events connecting local experiences to the global diaspora.