On January 07, 2025 (Tuesday), the Supreme Court (SC) of India granted interim bail to Godman Asaram Bapu, serving a life sentence in a 2013 rape case, on medical grounds till March 31, 2025. The two-judge bench of the SC constituting Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal passed the order directing that Bapu should not meet his followers upon his release and should not tamper with evidence. During the proceedings, learned senior counsel Devadatt Kamat (appearing for the petitioner) submitted, “The condition of the petitioner is precarious.” He added that the petitioner is to be around 86 years of age, suffering from age-related ailments, and has suffered two heart attacks which are not in dispute. The learned senior counsel further submitted, “He has been taken in and out of the prison repeatedly on more than 13 different occasions for medical treatment.”
Furthermore, learned Solicitor General Tushar Mehta (appearing for the respondent) said, “...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.” After hearing the matter, the SC bench observed, “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 bench also pointed out that it took note of the medical records pertaining to the petitioner and the fact that he was given periodical treatment outside the prison.
Considering this, the top court ordered, “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.” The bench added, “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.”