The Supreme Court of India has granted bail to three individuals accused of tampering with evidence in the high-profile 2024 Pune Porsche crash case, in which two young software professionals, Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta, lost their lives. The accused—Aditya Avinash Sood, Ashish Satish Mittal, and Amar Santosh Gaikwad—were arrested on allegations that they had swapped their own blood samples with those of the minors who were inside the car at the time of the accident, including the primary accused who was 17 years old.
The bail plea was heard by a Bench comprising Justice B V Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan. While granting relief, the Bench observed that the continued incarceration of the accused served little purpose, particularly as they had remained undertrial prisoners for over three years. The court also noted that the trial showed no real progress, with as many as 159 prosecution witnesses yet to be examined, raising serious concerns about prolonged delay and prejudice to the accused.
The Bench recorded that even if it were ultimately established that the juvenile was responsible for causing the fatal accident, proceedings against him were already underway before the Juvenile Justice Board. In such circumstances, the judges observed that keeping the appellants in jail indefinitely, without meaningful advancement in the trial, would be unjust. The court emphasised that extended incarceration, coupled with an overburdened witness list, tilted the balance in favour of granting bail.
The case had triggered nationwide outrage soon after the incident, as the main accused was a minor at the time of the crash. He was allegedly driving the luxury Porsche under the influence of alcohol when the vehicle struck a scooter, killing Awadhiya and Koshta on the spot. Public anger intensified further when the Juvenile Justice Board initially granted bail to the teenager within hours, directing him to perform police station duties for 15 days, write a 300-word essay on road accidents, undergo de-addiction treatment, and attend counselling sessions—an order that was widely criticised as grossly inadequate.
Sood and Mittal were arrested on August 19 last year after investigators alleged that their blood samples had been used to replace those of the two minors present in the Porsche, in an attempt to manipulate forensic evidence. In December last year, the Bombay High Court rejected their bail pleas, along with those of six other accused. Subsequently, the matter reached the Supreme Court.
Earlier, on January 13, the apex court had issued notice to the Maharashtra government, seeking an explanation as to why charges had not yet been framed by the trial court, despite the fact that one of the petitioners had been arrested as far back as March 2022. This delay was a significant factor in the court’s consideration of bail.
While granting bail, the Supreme Court allowed the prosecution liberty to seek stringent conditions to safeguard its interests. Accordingly, the court imposed specific restrictions, including a direction that one of the petitioners must not leave his hometown of Ankleshwar in Gujarat, except for attending trial proceedings. He was also directed to mark his presence at the local police station every Sunday and surrender his passport before the trial court.
The Bench also made sharp observations on the role of the parents of the main accused, expressing strong disapproval of what it described as a failure of responsible parenting. Justice Nagarathna remarked that both parents were to be blamed for not exercising adequate control or guidance over their child, though she added that the court was cautious about making further remarks that could prejudice the ongoing trial.
Despite acknowledging the gravity of the offence and the loss of two innocent lives, the court observed that the only factor operating in favour of the accused at this stage was their prolonged incarceration without trial progress. Weighing personal liberty against the overall circumstances, the Bench noted that this balance ultimately justified the grant of bail.
The judges also strongly rebuked arguments that appeared to trivialise the incident, stressing that reckless driving and the killing of people on roads or footpaths cannot be treated as youthful “celebration.” The Bench criticised a culture in which parents substitute time and supervision with money and unchecked freedom, warning that such attitudes inevitably lead to public outrage and tragic consequences.
Following the widespread backlash over the initial “essay punishment,” the Pune Police approached the Juvenile Justice Board seeking a review. The Board subsequently modified its order and sent the juvenile to an observation home, from where he was released in June last year. The parents of the main accused, Vishal Agarwal and Shivani Agarwal, are also named among the accused in the alleged blood-sample swapping conspiracy, keeping the case under intense public and judicial scrutiny.
