Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Asharam Alias Ashumal vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 14 January, 2025
Bench: Dinesh Mehta, Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:2204-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension Of Sentence Application (Appeal)
No. 68/2025
Asharam Alias Ashumal S/o Shri Thewardas, Aged About 85
Years, R/o Sant Shri Asharambapu Ashram,motera Road,
Sabarmati, P.s. Chandkheda, Dist Ahmedabad (Guj) (Presently
Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur For Around 12 Years 9 Months
(With Remission)As Of 06.01.2025)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. RS Saluja, through VC
Mr. Nishant Bora
Mr. Acharaj Singh
Mr. Yashpal Singh Rajpurohit
Mr. Bharat Sain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG
Mr. PC Solanki for the complainant
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
14/01/2025
1. The present application has been filed by the applicant under
section 389 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, who is serving
sentence and is lodged in Central Jail, Jodhpur on account of his
conviction vide order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the Special
Judge, POCSO Act Cases, Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.116/2016.
2. Mr. Bora, learned counsel for the applicant invited Court's
attention towards the order dated 07.01.2025 which has been
passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal
(Crl.) No.15945/2024 in applicant's own case and submitted that
[2025:RJ-JD:2204-DB] (2 of 5) [SOSA-68/2025]
the applicant was convicted vide judgment and order dated
31.01.2023 passed by the District and Sessions Judge,
Gandhinagar in Session Case No.34/2014 and the same was
affirmed by High Court of Gujarat by judgment and order dated
29.08.2024 and the Special Leave to Appeal (crl.) filed by him
before Hon'ble the Supreme Court for interim bail had been
allowed upto 31.03.2025 on medical grounds.
3. He prayed that similar indulgence be granted to the applicant
as has been granted by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the above
referred order so that he can get proper medical treatment. He
submitted that the petitioner would abide by the conditions as has
been imposed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court, while granting him
interim bail.
4. Learned Additional Advocate General and Mr. PC Solanki,
learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed
applicant's application for suspension of sentence, while
contending that the applicant's conviction vide order dated
31.01.2023 passed by the District and Sessions Judge,
Gandhinagar did not involve any offence punishable under the
provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 (hereinafter referred to as the 'POCSO Act'), whereas in the
present case, applicant is also convicted under the provisions of
the same (POCSO Act).
5. The Hon'ble the Supreme Court while considering the
applicant's case for grant of interim bail has observed thus:-
"We had already made it very clear by our
earlier order dated 13.12.2024 that we are not
inclined to consider the plea on merits, but only
on medical ground.
[2025:RJ-JD:2204-DB] (3 of 5) [SOSA-68/2025]
Learned senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that the condition of the
petitioner is precarious. The petitioner is stated
to be around 86 years of age, suffering from
age related ailments and has suffered two heart
attacks which are not in dispute. He has been
taken in and out of the prison repeatedly on
more than 13 different occasions for medical
treatment. It is further submitted that even the
High Court had granted parole after taking into
consideration the medical condition of the
petitioner. The affidavit filed by the State would
also establish that treatment has been given to
the petitioner for heart ailment.
Learned Solicitor General appearing for the
respondent submits that though the ailment is
not in dispute and so also the age, treatment
can be extended in the prison itself, which the
petitioner is reluctant to undertake. In any
case, considering the facts and circumstances
of the case, adequate security will have to be
provided to the petitioner. It is further
submitted that, on merit, the petitioner does
not have a case.
As stated, we are not inclined to go into the
merits of the case. The medical condition of the
petitioner is not in dispute. It is the concern of
the State and this Court to take into
consideration the health condition of the
petitioner-convict. In such view of the matter,
we have no hesitation in holding that the
petitioner does require interim bail on medical
ground. The appeal is also of the year 2023.
There is also some suggestion of lifestyle
changes.
[2025:RJ-JD:2204-DB] (4 of 5) [SOSA-68/2025]
We have also taken note of the medical
records pertaining to the petitioner and the fact
that he was given periodical treatment outside
the prison.
Hence, we deem it fit to grant bail to the
petitioner on medical ground till 31st March,
2025.
This order is passed, subject to the condition
that the petitioner shall not meet his followers
in a group.
There shall be three security personnel in the
form of police officers to be present in the
vicinity of the petitioner. We make it clear that
the police personnel will not interfere with the
petitioner's medical treatment, his meeting with
any individual and in a normal or lawful
conduct.
We further make it clear that the
observations made in the impugned judgment
on merits will not have any bearing on any
future proceedings, including the criminal
appeal which is pending before the High Court.
Liberty is also given to the petitioner to
approach the High Court for any further need
on this ground.
The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of
accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of."
6. So far as applicant's medical condition is concerned, the
same was neither disputed before Hon'ble the Supreme Court nor
is the same in dispute before this Court.
[2025:RJ-JD:2204-DB] (5 of 5) [SOSA-68/2025]
7. In view of the aforesaid, in order to maintain parity, we are
inclined to grant interim bail to the applicant upto 31.03.2025 for
his medical treatment on the same conditions.
8. Mr. Bora, learned counsel undertakes that the cost of
travelling, lodging and boarding of three police constable to be
provided by the State authorities of Rajasthan shall be borne by
the applicant, if he wants to take his treatment at any place other
than Jodhpur.
9. The petitioner's release upto 31.03.2025 shall remain subject
to conditions which have been imposed by Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in above quoted order dated 07.01.2025.
10. The present application for suspension of sentence stands
disposed of.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J (DINESH MEHTA),J
1-raksha/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
