Gujarat HC extends Asaram's interim medical bail till August 21
This was the third extension granted to the religious leader during his interim medical bail, Bar and Bench reported.
A bench of Justices Ilesh J Vora and PM Raval on Thursday noted that the applicant was in an intensive care unit at a hospital in Indore and had a very high troponin level. It quoted doctors as saying that 'his condition is critical'.
Asaram is serving a life sentence for raping a woman disciple at his Ahmedabad ashram between 2001 and 2006. He was convicted in January 2023 under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including rape, unnatural offences and assault with intent to outrage modesty.
He is also serving a separate life term for raping a 16-year-old girl at his Rajasthan ashram.
In January, the Supreme Court had granted interim bail to Asaram on medical grounds till March 31. Towards the end of his bail period, he approached the High Court, which delivered a split verdict on extending his bail. The case was referred to a third judge, who granted him three months' temporary bail till July 7.
On July 3, the High Court had extended the religious leader's interim bail by 30 days but stated that this would be the final extension. However, Asaram moved the Supreme Court, which permitted him to re-apply to the High Court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
28 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi: Protests continue over SC order on dogs
Protesters gathered at Central Park near India Gate on Saturday evening against the Supreme Court's recent order to shift all street dogs in the city to shelters. Animal lovers during a protest against the recent order by the Supreme Court to authorities in Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) to start picking up stray dogs from all localities and relocate the animals to dog shelters, at Connaught Place(PTI) Protesters, largely animal rights activists and dog lovers, said they had assembled around 6pm with banners and were assaulted by Delhi Police personnel at the site. 'Security personnel came to us and asked us to leave. All the exits of Central Park were shut and only one exit gate was open. While we were leaving through the only exit gate, they started assaulting us, even women. We were stuffed inside a few buses and later released at Jantar Mantar and Jhandewalan at around 7–7.30pm,' Divya Puri, co-founder of the Karan Puri Foundation, said. Purported videos circulated on social media by the group showed uniformed officials hitting protesters and dragging them into buses. Activists said women were also subjected to verbal abuse and assault. 'The protesters were gathered peacefully. The police deployment was as much as the people gathered there. They abused and assaulted us and tried to tear our clothes. Is gathering peacefully also banned now?' asked Tarana Singh, another activist. A senior Delhi Police officer, meanwhile, said holding protests inside Central Park is prohibited and the gathering had no permission to do so. The protesters allegedly charged at officers first and the police retaliated, the officer added. An FIR under Section 223 (disobedience of order by a public servant) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita has been registered against the protesters, the fifth such case in connection with similar demonstrations. Deputy commissioner of police (New Delhi) Devesh Kumar Mahla said Section 163 (issuing orders in urgent cases of nuisance) of the BNSS has been imposed in New Delhi area because of the ongoing parliament session. 'We are bound by law to take action when there is a protest at places which are not designated for protests,' he said. When asked about videos of a female sub-inspector hitting a protester inside a detention bus, the first officer claimed that an inquiry was initiated and it was found that the protester had struck first, following which the SI retaliated.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
SC grants bail to Laxmi Road shoe shopowner murder accused
1 2 Pune: The Supreme Court on August 13 granted bail to Anil Sapkal (52), one of the seven accused in the murder of Laxmi Road shoe shopowner. A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta stated that they were inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, Sapkal, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of his incarceration of more than five years, and the fact that the co-accused, Ajinkya Dhumal, was granted bail. The court said it would be open for the prosecution to press before the trial court for determining stringent conditions, considering the role of the petitioner (Sapkal) and the seriousness of the matter. Sapkal was arrested for allegedly conspiring in the abduction and murder of Laxmi Road shoe shopowner Chandan Shevani for failing to pay an extortion of Rs5 crore. The incident occurred at Bopdev Ghat on January 4, 2020. You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune | Gold Rates Today in Pune | Silver Rates Today in Pune The Supreme Court (SC) order read that it went without saying that the petitioner would extend all cooperation during the trial. It stated that the trial court or state could approach the SC for recalling this order in case they found that the petitioner was delaying the trial. SC lawyer Sana Raees Khan argued that Sapkal was implicated in the murder case as a prime conspirator based on a belated statement of a gang leader's wife after former's arrest. Khan said no call details record (CDR) of the gang leader's wife was annexed to the chargesheet to corroborate this allegation, and the basis of Sapkal's arrest was not established. Khan prayed to release Sapkal on bail because the evidence collected by the Pune police had no conclusive evidence to establish that he was a member of an organised crime syndicate. Constant calls with the criminal on record was not enough to indict Sapkal in the murder in the absence of a transcript of the CDR, which was not a substantive piece of evidence, she added. The police filed a chargesheet against seven accused, including criminals on record Parvez Hanif Shaikh (47) and Preetam Ramesh Aambre (41) as the prime accused, and Sapkal, in the Shevani murder case. The chargesheet stated that the accused shot him dead after he repeatedly expressed his inability to fulfil their extortion demand. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Court clears Bishop Emeritus of charges under POCSO Act
Pune: A sessions court in the city discharged Bishop Emeritus Thomas Dabre (79) of Poona Diocese of charges of allegedly violating provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act by failing to disclose information about a sexual assault incident involving a 14-year-old boy at a school in 2018. Additional sessions judge Anirudhha Gandhi, in his order of August 8, noted, "The Bishop in a meeting asked a police officer if he should report the sexual assault incident to the police. But the officer said a Bishop cannot be forced to make a complaint and advised him that only a victim could file a complaint. The Bishop thus discharged his duty of communicating the incident to the police. He still directed his subordinate to inform the incident to the Wanowrie police and a letter dated March 20, 2018, was sent giving details of the incident involving the school principal. " The Wanowrie police filed a chargesheet against a school principal and another individual for sexually assaulting and harassing the minor under the Indian Penal Code and the POCSO Act . Subsequently, a supplementary chargesheet was filed against the Bishop after investigations allegedly revealed that he did not report the incident to the police. You Can Also Check: Pune AQI | Weather in Pune | Bank Holidays in Pune | Public Holidays in Pune | Gold Rates Today in Pune | Silver Rates Today in Pune The court observed, "There was insufficient material on record to prima facie show that the Bishop committed an offence under Section 21 (failure to report or record a case of child abuse) of the POCSO Act. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like She Mixed Pink Salt With This - Now She Can't Stop Losing Weight Your Health Undo On the contrary, there was sufficient material indicating that he informed the police about the incident. The police, the victim or the informant did not register an FIR until September 2018. The Bishop cannot be held responsible for the delay on the part of the police and the informant. " The judge said the maximum punishment prescribed under Section 21 of the POCSO Act was one year imprisonment. The FIR was registered on March 16, 2018. The court said the complainant had no complaint against the Bishop for not informing the incident to the police. The supplementary chargesheet was filed against the Bishop on July 26, 2024, six years after the incident. No cognizance can be taken of a chargesheet filed after a year of the incident under Section 468 (bar of taking cognizance after lapse of period of limitation) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bishop's lawyer, Sandeep Bali, argued that the supplementary chargesheet was filed against his client without evidence and prayed to discharge him. Additional public prosecutor Vishwas Satupute told TOI, "I will submit a proposal to the state law and judiciary department to file a criminal miscellaneous appeal in the Bombay high court to set aside the discharge order." Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
