Pune Porsche Crash Case: Supreme Court Grants Bail to 3 Accused Over Long Jail Term

The Supreme Court has granted bail to three accused in the high-profile Pune Porsche crash case of 2024, citing prolonged incarceration and lack of meaningful progress in the trial. The case relates to allegations of tampering with blood samples following a fatal road accident that claimed the lives of two young professionals, Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta.

The accused who have been granted bail are Aditya Avinash Sood, Ashish Satish Mittal, and Amar Santosh Gaikwad. They were arrested for allegedly swapping their blood samples with those of the primary accused, who was a minor and was driving the Porsche at the time of the crash. The prosecution alleged that this act was intended to interfere with the investigation, particularly to dilute evidence related to alcohol consumption.

While allowing the bail pleas, a bench of the Supreme Court observed that the accused had remained in undertrial custody for over three years. The court noted that continuing their incarceration would serve little purpose, especially given the slow pace of the trial. According to the records placed before the court, as many as 159 prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined, raising concerns about further delays.

The bench highlighted that multiplying witnesses without corresponding progress in the trial could prejudice the rights of the accused. It further noted that even if the investigation ultimately concludes that the juvenile was responsible for causing the accident, the minor is already being dealt with under a separate legal framework before the Juvenile Justice Board. In such circumstances, prolonged detention of the accused in the blood sample swapping case, without substantial movement in the trial, was deemed unjustified.

The Pune Porsche crash had triggered widespread public outrage across the country. The incident occurred in May 2024, when a luxury sports car, allegedly driven under the influence of alcohol, hit a two-wheeler carrying Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta, killing both on the spot. The driver was 17 years old at the time, which added to the controversy surrounding the case.

Public anger intensified after the juvenile was granted bail within hours of the incident, with conditions that included community service, writing an essay on road safety, counselling sessions, and treatment for alcohol-related habits. The perceived leniency of the order sparked nationwide debate on juvenile justice, road safety, and accountability in cases involving serious offences.

Sood and Mittal were arrested on August 19 following allegations that their blood samples were used in place of the minors who were present in the Porsche during the accident. Investigators claimed that the swap was part of an attempt to manipulate forensic evidence. Their pleas for bail, along with those of six other accused, were earlier rejected by the Bombay High Court in December last year.

With the Supreme Court’s latest order granting bail to three of the accused, the focus now shifts back to the trial process and the pace at which evidence will be examined. The case continues to be closely watched, given its legal complexities and the broader questions it raises about justice delivery in cases involving minors and serious criminal allegations.