Pune Porsche crash: Bombay HC to pass order in plea by minor’s aunt seeking his release from ‘illegal’ custody

The court Friday, while noting that the accident was “unfortunate”, also enquired whether keeping the juvenile accused, who was granted bail, in an observation home, amounted to confinement.

A bench of Justices Bharati H Dangre and Manjusha A Deshpande said that the child was also in trauma.

“Two people have lost their lives. There was trauma but the child was also in trauma,” the bench remarked.

Senior advocate Aabad Ponda representing the petitioner argued that free person’s liberty was trampled upon when he was remanded to custody in observation home after being granted bail.

The bench then questioned the police as to under what provisions of law the bail order was reviewed and how he was kept in a confinement.

In the early hours of May 19, the juvenile was allegedly driving a Porsche car at a very high speed in an inebriated state when the vehicle crashed into a bike, killing two software engineers, Aneesh Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta, in Pune’s Kalyani Nagar.

The paternal aunt of the child in conflict with law (CCL) through a writ petition in the HC last week had claimed that as per the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, the CCL is required to be ensure that any conflict with the law does not result into him turning into a hardened criminal.

In a plea filed through advocate Swapnil Ambure, the petitioner claimed that the CCL could not have been taken away from custody of his grandfather and put in an observation home by recalling or reviewing an earlier order of May 19, which had ordered his release.

The plea claimed that it was “completely in contravention to law” and urged the HC to look into the issue.

The HC bench noted that till date the police had not filed any application before an appellate court seeking cancellation of the bail order of the Juvenile Justice Board.

However, police had approached for amendment of bail order, which was granted and the CCL was taken in custody to an observational home.

“What type of remand is this? What is the power to remand? What kind of procedure is this where a person has been granted bail and then a remand is passed taking him in custody,” the court questioned.

It said that the juvenile was also taken away from care and supervision of his family and sent to observation home and said it was expected the JJB to be responsible.

Public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar for police justified remand orders passed by the JJB and urged the HC to not intervene in the same.

He said that the blood samples of the Juvenile were tampered with and action has been taken against the culprits. “We have to send a strong message to society. Just writing a 300-word essay on road safety (as earlier ordered by JJB) is not enough,” he argued.

The bench concluded the hearing and reserved its order, which it will pass on June 25.