Asaram Bapu Moves Supreme Court Citing Medical Emergency; Hearing Fixed For July 17

The matter was mentioned before the Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and PB Varale by Senior Advocate D.S. Naidu, who sought an urgent listing on medical grounds.

During the mentioning, Naidu submitted that Asaram suffered acute internal bleeding on July 8, following which he was admitted to AIIMS Jodhpur. He informed the Court that Asaram had been categorised as a high-risk patient and required a blood transfusion after being admitted in a critical condition.

Citing the medical emergency, the senior counsel requested that the matter be taken up urgently.

Taking note of the submission, the Supreme Court directed that the plea be listed for hearing on Friday, July 17.

Asaram is currently serving a sentence in a rape case and has approached the Supreme Court seeking relief. The merits of his plea will now be considered on the scheduled date.

In June, Bapu had approached the Supreme Court against the Rajasthan High Court's May 2026 decision whereby partly allowed the appeals filed by the self-styled spiritual leader and his co-accused in the 2013 sexual assault case involving a minor girl, setting aside the conviction under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code (gang rape) and certain provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) but upheld Asaram’s conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC.

A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Sheel Nagu has issued notice in Asaram's SLP saying that it will consider it.

Senior Advocate DS Naidu appeared for Asaram. "He is 90 now..many medical issues..he was taken to an ayurvedic hospital..This court is our only hope...there is social media conviction now..," Naidu told the bench today. "Let the treatment being given to him continue...list after re-opening..," the bench went on to order.

What happened in the High Court?

In May, a Rajasthan High Court division bench of Justice Arun Monga and Justice Yogendra Kumar Purohit delivered the judgment while deciding criminal appeals challenging the 2018 conviction recorded by the Special POCSO Court at Jodhpur. While acquitting co-accused Sharad and Shilpi of all charges, the Bench held that the evidence on record was sufficient to sustain Asaram’s conviction for rape and therefore declined to interfere with the punishment imposed by the trial court.

The Court also directed Asaram to surrender before the authorities at Jodhpur Central Jail. The judgment comes nearly eight years after the Special POCSO Court convicted Asaram for sexually assaulting a minor girl and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The case attracted significant public attention owing to the stature of the accused and the serious nature of the allegations made by the prosecutrix.

The prosecution case arose from allegations made by a minor girl who accused Asaram of sexually assaulting her at his ashram. According to the prosecution, the assault occurred under the guise of spiritual healing and religious guidance. Following registration of the First Information Report, investigating authorities conducted an inquiry based on medical evidence, witness statements and other circumstantial material before filing a chargesheet against the accused persons.

After a full-fledged trial, the Special POCSO Court at Jodhpur, on April 25, 2018, found Asaram guilty and sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life. The trial court had also convicted the co-accused and imposed substantial terms of imprisonment. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the accused persons approached the High Court through separate criminal appeals.

The Division Bench had reserved judgment on April 20 after the completion of final arguments. Upon examining the evidence and findings of the trial court, the High Court undertook a charge-wise assessment of the prosecution case. While partly allowing the appeals, the Bench reiterated a fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every charge levelled against an accused must be independently established beyond reasonable doubt.

Applying this standard, the Court found that the prosecution had failed to conclusively prove the ingredients necessary to sustain the charge of gang rape under Section 376D IPC and certain aggravated offences alleged under the POCSO Act. As a result, the accused were entitled to the benefit of doubt in relation to those charges. The Court observed that the evidence available on record did not sufficiently establish the allegation of gang rape. Consequently, the conviction under Section 376D IPC was set aside. The Court also found deficiencies in the evidence supporting certain POCSO charges and accordingly interfered with those findings as well.

At the same time, the Bench was clear that the failure of the prosecution to establish every charge did not necessarily undermine the core allegation of rape against Asaram. The Court noted that the testimony and allegations of the prosecutrix, when evaluated alongside the material available on record, remained credible and reliable for the purpose of sustaining a conviction under Section 376 IPC.

Asaram’s conviction under Section 376 IPC and the punishment of imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life therefore continue to remain in force despite the partial relief granted in appeal.

Case Title: Asha Ram @ Ashumal v. State of Rajasthan