Hid behind cloak of godman: Rajasthan HC upholds Asaram Bapu's rape conviction but acquits him of gang rape

The Jodhpur bench of Rajasthan High Court on Wednesday upheld the conviction of self-styled godman Asaram Bapu for sexually assaulting a minor devotee in Jodhpur in 2013. [Asha Ram @ Ashumal v. State and connected petitions]

A division bench of Justices Arun Monga and Yogendra Kumar Purohit explained how faith enabled Bapu to commit the crime since the girl’s parents, as long time disciples of the Godman, sent their children to a ‘Gurukul’ named after Asaram and took her to him for ‘ghost-healing’.

“Faith is a powerful force. Powerful enough to suspend even the sharpest of minds. Devotees of religious gurus will often embrace, without question, the most superstitious pronouncements and irrational counsel, including tales of ghosts and the supernatural,” the Court held. 

The Court refused to show leniency on imprisonment time despite Asaram now being 86.

The bench warned that any such indulgence would shake society’s faith in the criminal justice system when the perpetrator hid behind the ‘cloak of a self‑styled godman’. 

“We are unable to grant any indulgence since in the shadow of his frailty cannot justify ignoring the victim’s voice. Quiet. Devastating. Irrefutable. To ignore it would be to shake society's faith in the criminal justice system, and send wrong a message no court must ever send, least of all when the perpetrator hid behind the cloak of a self-styled godman," the judgment said.

The judges remarked how devotees lose rationality when trapped in crisis and despair. 

“It is precisely in such moments of vulnerability that the irrational finds its most willing audience. Devotion thus has a peculiar power to suspend reason. Quite often, devotees of religious gurus would fall prey, without questioning those in whom they have faith. As seems to have happened in the case in hand,” the Court observed.

The Court refused to show leniency on imprisonment time despite Asaram now being 86.

“We are unable to grant any indulgence since in the shadow of his frailty cannot justify ignoring the victim’s voice,” it said. 

The bench warned that any such indulgence would shake society’s faith in the criminal justice system when the perpetrator hid behind the ‘cloak of a self‑styled godman’. 

The Court was hearing appeals filed by Asaram Bapu and two co-accused, hostel warden Sanchita Shilpi and school director Sharad Chandra.

It upheld the trial court’s findings that the devotee-victim, then a minor, had been wrongfully confined in Asaram Bapu’s ‘kutiya’ (thatched house) at his ashram in Jodhpur's Manai in August of 2013 and subjected to penetrative sexual assault and criminal intimidation. 

“It stood proved on record that the appellant had threatened the prosecutrix that her family would be finished, if she would raise her voice or ever reveal the incident to anyone,” the High Court held. 

However, the bench found that the ingredients of criminal conspiracy and gang rape were not made out. 

It set aside the conviction for gang rape and criminal conspiracy and acquitted the two co-accused in the case under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). 

“There is not even any allegation that more than one person had committed the offence of rape, let alone reliable evidence on record to prove the same. In our opinion, trial court erred in convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence gang rape. Thus, he ought to be acquitted of the said charge,” the bench held. 

It also concluded that prosecution had failed to prove criminal conspiracy since the requisite “meeting of minds” between Asaram and the co-accused had not been established. 

On the delay in lodging the FIR, the Court agreed with the trial court in rejecting the defence argument, noting Asaram’s stature and powers appeared to have scared the victim. 

“Even if some part of the delay in lodging in the FIR remains unexplained, the same is not fatal to the case, provided the available material against the accused satisfies the conscience of the Court. It seems that this test is also met in the instant case,” the Court held. 

[Read Judgment]