The Bombay High Court today directed that the minor accused in the Pune Porsche accident case be released under the guardianship of his paternal aunt.

A division bench comprising Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande granted permission for the release of the minor accused, who is currently housed in an observation home, in response to a habeas corpus petition filed by his paternal aunt.

The court declared the remand orders issued by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) as illegal and lacking jurisdiction.

The court has directed that the counselling sessions with a psychologist ordered by the JJB should continue after the minor's release.

During last week's hearing, the court had questioned the Juvenile Justice Board's decision to remand the minor accused in the Pune Porsche accident case to an observation home despite already being released on bail.

The bench had remarked that the remand and its subsequent extension “completely nullified the effect of bail.”

The bench had queried the authority to remand a juvenile to an observation home after bail had been granted.

The court noted that the minor could not attend court-mandated counselling sessions due to concerns about potential mob violence.

On May 19, 2024, an incident occurred in Kalyani Nagar where a 17-year-old, reportedly the son of a prominent Pune builder, allegedly driving a Porsche Taycan while intoxicated, lost control and collided with a motorcycle. Tragically, the collision led to the fatalities of two individuals due to their injuries.

The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) granted bail to the minor driver on May 19, 2023, just hours after the fatal accident. However, on May 22, 2024, the JJB remanded the teenager accused to an observation home. His remand was subsequently extended. In related cases, his parents and grandfather are also in custody. Last week, a Pune court granted bail to the father in a case under the Motor Vehicles Act.

The court observed that the prosecution had not filed any application to cancel the bail granted to the minor and emphasized that it would not deny relief based on the grounds of maintainability.