LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Porsche accident case: Pune court denies bail to parents of minor, others

23/08/2024BlogNo Comments

A local court in Maharashtra on Thursday refused to grant bail to six individuals, including the parents of a minor driver, accused of tampering with the evidence in the Kalyaninagar car accident case.

Additional District Judge UM Mudholkar came down heavily on the accused for conspiring to swap blood samples and shielding the minor driver from legal consequences.

The court rejected the applications filed by the parents of the minor -Vishal and Shivani, who were accused of orchestrating the conspiracy. it further denied bail to Dr. Shrihari Halnor and Dr. Ajay Taware, doctors at Sassoon Hospital, who allegedly facilitated the illegal blood sample swap.

The court also rejected the plea filed by Ashpak Makandar and Amar Gaikwad, accused of acting as middlemen in the transaction.

The court held that releasing the accused on bail would send a wrong message to society and could hinder the pursuit of justice in the case.

It noted that even before the splashes of blood lying on the road of the victims/occupants of the motorcycle could dry, the tampering with the evidence commenced and concluded to a large extent, with the help of monetary influence or otherwise at odd hours of midnight.

The tampering seemed to be ‘in the genes/DNA’ of modus of commission of crime in this case, it added.

On May 19, 2024, a minor (referred to as a child in conflict with the law/ CCL) allegedly drove a Porsche recklessly at high speed, fatally hitting Anis Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta, who were on a motorcycle.

The prosecution alleged that within hours of the crash, the parents of the minor paid Rs 3 lakh to Dr. Halnor, who was responsible for collecting the minor’s blood samples to determine whether he had been driving under the influence of alcohol.

The court recorded in its order that instead of taking the CCL’s blood sample, Dr. Halnor allegedly replaced it with a sample from Shivani, the minor’s mother, to conceal the driver’s intoxication.

It noted that after carefully analysing the entire material placed in the form of charge sheet, it became crystal clear that there was substance in the allegation that applicants Vishal and Shivani conspired with all the remaining applicants – Dr. Halnor, Dr. Taware, Ashpak Makandar, and Amar Gaikwad to replace the blood sample of applicant Shivani in the place of CCL by adopting the illegal mode of offering bribe to both the doctors, and for that purpose, applicant Ashpak and Amar extended their active help.

The judge further highlighted that the evidence presented included CCTV footage and call data records (CDRs) that captured the accused coordinating the alleged crime at Sassoon Hospital in the middle of the night.

The Bench observed that in the odd hours of midnight, all the accused gathered in the premises of the Sassoon Hospital and performed their particular incriminating role to achieve the target of replacing the blood sample of Shivani in the place of blood of CCL.

The actions of the accused were corroborated by witness statements, it added.

Taking in view the severity of the alleged crime and the potential for evidence tampering if the accused were granted bail, the judge said the grant of bail at this stage would certainly lead to tampering of the evidence of the material witnesses.

The legal course may get thwarted and there may be a denial of legal justice to the victims, their family members, as well as society at large, it added.

The court further dismissed the defence’s argument that the accused had little opportunity to tamper with electronic or documentary evidence.

It said the possibility of tampering with documentary and electronic evidence by the applicants may be Nil, but the same cannot be treated to be acceptable as regards the statements of several witnesses whose oral evidence in the court would be of very crucial nature.

However, the judge refuted comparisons made by the prosecution between the parents of the accused and notorious fugitives like Vijay Mallya & Nirav Modi, stating that such comparisons were ‘fanciful’ and hence deserved rejection.

The accused were represented by Senior Advocate Harshad Nimbalkar, along with Advocates Sudhir Shah, Rishikesh Ganu and Prasad Kulkarni.

Special Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray appeared for the State.

The post Porsche accident case: Pune court denies bail to parents of minor, others appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • India-Canada: Critical Partners Must Reset Diplomatic Ties
  • Lawless Ambitions, Judicial Setbacks, And A Billionaire Rebellion
  • The Politics of Sindoor
  • CJI BR Gavai terms arbitration as strong pillar showcasing transformation of justice delivery system
  • “One Rank, One Pension”: SC Ends Discrimination in Judges’ Benefits

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.