Bombay High Court on Tuesday ordered an immediate release of the 17-year-old teen accused in the Pune Porsche case. On the night of May 19, the minor dashed his car into a bike, claiming the lives of two 24-year-old engineers. This case garnered nationwide outrage when the accused was asked to write a 300-word essay as a punishment for his offence.

The boy was sent to an observation home soon after immediate bail was granted to him. Today, the bench of Justices Bharti Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande ordered his release from detention, stating, "We are bound by law, the aims and objectives of the Juvenile Justice Act and must treat him as any child in conflict with law separately from adult, despite the seriousness of the crime."

The court clarified that the Juvenile Justice Board's order of detaining him to an observation was unlawful and came without proper jurisdiction. The court further clarified, that the accused is under rehabilitation and needs observation from a psychologist, the court accounted the rehabilitation as the "primary objective." "The CCL (child in conflict with the law) is under 18. His age needs to be considered," the court stated.

Pune Porsche case
Image Source: LiveLaw

The aunt of the accused, who currently has custody of him, filed a habeas corpus petition resulting, in his release from the government observation home. Since his parents and grandfather were arrested for attempting to cover up the crime, the boy will stay with his aunt.

Habeas Corpus Petition Leads to Release in Pune Porsche Case

Prashant Patil, the aunt's lawyer, stated, "Our case was simple. Based purely on law, a child in conflict with law cannot be detained in the manner in which he was detained in this case."

On the night of May 19th, the accused ran his Porsche into a bike, killing Ashwini Kostha and Aneesh Awadhiya, two 24-year-old software engineers. According to an eyewitness, the boy was heavily drunk at the time of the accident. CCTV footage from the pub also showed the teen drinking before the crash.

The Accused was granted bail within 15 hours of the accident. The Juvenile Justice Board added some conditions to the bail that garnered the public outburst. The accused was instructed to write a 300-word essay on road accidents, work with the traffic police for 15 days, and seek counselling for his drinking habit. However, after the public outrage, the Juvenile Justice Board revised its decision and sent the teenager to an observation home.

Earlier this month, the boy's aunt pleaded a petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the boy's detention. The petition challenged the remanding of the boy to the observation home as a "complete violation" of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

The court while ordering his release, said, "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."

"He is a person who has been granted bail, but now he has been confined to an observation home. Is this not confinement? We would like to know your source of power," the court questioned, claiming the Juvenile Justice Board was responsible.

You might also be interested in - Porsche does not see India as an emerging market anymore: Report