Pune Porsche Case : Supreme Court Grants Bail To Three Accused Of Swapping Blood Samples Of Juvenile Passengers

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to three accused alleged to have conspired to swap blood samples, following the 2024 Pune Porsche accident that killed two persons.

A Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan ordered the release of Ashish Satish Mittal, Aditya Avinash Sood and Amar Santhosh Gaikwad, subject to conditions to be imposed by the trial court, noting their prolonged incarceration of 18 months.

They were accused of swapping the blood samples of two minor occupants of the car (other than the alleged minor driver), who were allegedly under the influence of alcohol, with their own blood samples. They are booked under various sections of the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act for forgery, evidence tampering, and bribery.

Ashish Mittal is the friend of the father of the child, who was in the back of the car, and Aditya Sood is the father of the child, who was in the back. Amar Gaikwad is an alleged middleman who received the sum of 3 lacs for the purpose of replacing the blood sample of the the two Juveniles seated in the back

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for one of the accused, submitted that there were no allegations against the two juveniles seated in the back of the car. It was also contended that the accident was not caused by a juvenile, and that a driver was driving the car. Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave appeared for Ashish Mittal, and Advocate Sana Raees Khan appeared for Amar Gaikwad.

It was also contended that the juvenile, who is accused of causing the accident after drunk driving, is facing proceedings before the Juvenile Justice Board, and that there was no reason to keep the appellants jailed. They have been incarcerated for over 18 months.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, for the mother of the deceased woman, opposed the bail, submitting that it was a "classic case of undermining the entire criminal justice system.” He argued that the conspiracy went beyond the initial accident and involved coordinated efforts to manipulate the investigation, including swapping of blood samples to conceal alcohol consumption.

After dictating the order for grant of bail, Justice Nagarathna made strong oral observations on parental responsibility, remarking that allowing minors to consume alcohol, providing them cars, and facilitating reckless celebrations reflected a serious social problem. She observed that such incidents followed a recurring pattern where attempts were made to shift blame, manipulate medical evidence, and limit criminal consequences.

However, she clarified that it was refraining from making detailed findings on these aspects to avoid prejudicing the ongoing trial.

"Father and mother are to be blamed for not having control over their children. If we say anything on that line we are only afraid that it may prejudice the trial against these appellants...Celebration on the basis of substance and then going in a top speed and resulting in killing of innocent people on the road or innocent people sleeping on the road....the law has to catch up on these people. Most importantly the parents are responsible for handing over the vehicle to the children and giving them sufficient to have a gala time...This is the problem. Because parents have no time to talk to the children, have a dialogue with them and spend time with the children. So what is the substitute? Money, ATM card. So they go on their own under mobile phone," Justice Nagarathna said.

Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 21370/2025 and SLP(Crl) No. 41/2026

Case Title – Ashish Satish Mittal v. State of Maharashtra along with Aditya Avinash Sood v. State of Maharashtra and connected case.

Appearance: Ms. Sana Raees Khan, Mr. Pranay Chitale AOR and Aditya Dutta For Petitioner (Amar Santosh Gaikwad)