Pune Porsche crash: SC grants bail to 3 accused in blood sample tampering case

New Delhi, Feb 2
The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to three persons alleged to have conspired in swapping blood samples to shield minors involved in the high-profile Pune Porsche hit-and-run case.

Observing that they had been incarcerated for nearly 20 months, a Bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan ordered the release of Ashish Satish Mittal, Aditya Avinash Sood, and Amar Santhosh Gaikwad, subject to conditions set by the trial court.

The three are accused of having played a role in swapping blood samples of two minor occupants of the Porsche car -- other than the alleged minor driver -- who were allegedly under the influence of alcohol at the time of the fatal accident.

They are booked under various provisions of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act for offences, including forgery, evidence tampering and bribery.

The fatal crash occurred in the early hours of May 19, 2024, when a Porsche car, allegedly driven by a 17-year-old boy under the influence of alcohol, mowed down two IT professionals -- Anis Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta -- in Pune’s Kalyaninagar area, triggering nationwide outrage.

Mittal is a friend of the father of one of the minors seated in the back of the car, while Sood is the father of the other minor occupant.

Gaikwad is alleged to have acted as a middleman who received Rs three lakh for facilitating the replacement of the blood samples of the two juveniles.

After dictating the order granting bail, the Justice Nagarathna-led Bench made strong oral observations on parental responsibility, describing the incident as reflective of a larger social problem.

“Celebration on the basis of substance and then going at top speed, resulting in the killing of innocent people on the road… the law has to catch up with these people. Most importantly, parents are responsible for handing over the vehicle to children and providing them with sufficient means to have a gala time,” the apex court remarked, while clarifying that it was refraining from detailed findings to avoid prejudicing the ongoing trial.

Earlier, a Pune Sessions Court had rejected the bail applications of several accused, observing that evidence tampering in the case appeared to be “in the genes/DNA of the modus operandi of commission of the crime” and that granting bail would send a “wrong message to society”.