Pune Porsche Accident Case: Conviction for Supplying Alcohol to Minor Without Age Verification; Bail Opposed for Pub Owners
By Lokmat English Desk | Updated: June 11, 2024 09:45 IST2024-06-11T09:40:23+5:302024-06-11T09:45:25+5:30
Investigations have revealed that the accused in the Porsche car accident case in Kalyani Nagar had taken bookings of ...

Pune Porsche Accident Case: Conviction for Supplying Alcohol to Minor Without Age Verification; Bail Opposed for Pub Owners
Investigations have revealed that the accused in the Porsche car accident case in Kalyani Nagar had taken bookings of friends, including the minor, for a party and supplied liquor to the pub drivers without verifying their age. The prosecution on Monday opposed the bail plea of pub owners and employees, including Vishal Agarwal, arguing that if the accused are granted bail, there is a possibility of tampering with evidence and obstructing the investigation. On bail, Special Judge S R. Salunkhe's court has concluded the hearing, and is likely to be decided on June 21.
Also Read | Pune: Society Secretary and Son Accused of Black Magic on Family Over Minor Dispute, FIR Registered
Builder Vishal Agarwal (50), Naman Prahlad Bhutada (25), son of the owner of Cosie Pub, manager Sachin Ashok Katkar (35), Blak Pub's associate manager Sandeep Sangle; Jayesh Satish Gaonkar, manager of the bar counter, and employee Nitesh Dhanesh Shewani (34) have applied for release on bail.
On behalf of the defense, Adv. S. K. Jain, Adv. Sudhir Shah, Adv. Amol Dange and Adv. Prashant Patil argued. The investigation into the case has been completed and the accused have fully cooperated with the investigation. The defense counsel for the accused said the sections against the accused were non-cognizable and they should be granted bail. This was opposed by special public prosecutor Vidya Vibhute and investigating officer Ganesh Mane.
Vishal Agarwal had absconded after the crime took place, had tampered with the CCTV footage of the house, tampered with the boy's blood sample, and pressurised the driver to take the blame, while the investigation revealed that the accused pub driver had supplied liquor to the minor boy and his friends before the accident incident and did not even put up a sign in the two pubs prohibiting the sale of liquor to minors. The prosecution, therefore, argued that the bail plea of the accused should be rejected.
Open in app