A Delhi court has denied bail to Goa nightclub owners Gaurav and Saurabh Luthra after a devastating fire killed 25 people. Authorities allege the duo fled to Thailand soon after the blaze, raising questions about evasion and accountability.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Thursday denied transit anticipatory bail to Gaurav Luthra and Saurabh Luthra, owners of the Goa nightclub where a devastating fire killed 25 people on the night of December 6.
The order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge Vandana of the Rohini Courts, marking a significant development in the high-profile case that has drawn widespread public attention.
The Luthra brothers, who reside in Delhi, were reportedly in Thailand following the incident. According to police, they fled the country within hours of the fire to evade arrest.
Goa Police told the court that the owners booked their tickets at 1:17 AM on December 7 and flew out at 5:25 AM the same morning, barely hours after the blaze began.
“The fire starts, people are dying, and you wake up and leave the country,”
argued Senior Advocate Abhinav Mukerji, appearing for Goa Police.
Police further alleged that the duo has no business interests in Thailand, contradicting the brothers’ claim that the trip was work-related.
The Fire Incident
Preliminary investigations reveal that the fire began in the basement of the nightclub around midnight.
The blaze then spread rapidly to the first floor, which housed the bar and restaurant area, resulting in mass casualties and extensive structural damage.
Authorities have also alleged that the nightclub was operating without a valid license, further intensifying scrutiny on the Luthras.
The Bail Plea and Defense Arguments
The nightclub owners filed for transit anticipatory bail on December 10, insisting they had not fled India but were on a business trip abroad.
Represented by Senior Advocates Siddharth Luthra and Tanveer Ahmed Mir, the defense argued that the Goa government was acting with “vengeance and revenge”, noting that one of their restaurants had been bulldozed and another sealed.
Mir emphasized the threat to their safety:
“People are baying for my blood. I am before the court, I am not absconding.”
He added that:
- The petitioners were willing to cooperate with the investigation
- They feared violence against them
- Both suffer from medical conditions
Police Counter
Goa Police challenged the narrative, stating the family did not cooperate when officers visited their Delhi residence.
According to Mukerji:
“The mother and sister said we don’t know where they are… The mother said she doesn’t even know her son’s phone number.”
He argued that the petitioners had misled the court, provided false statements, and operated the club in an unlawful manner.
Court’s Decision
After hearing both sides, the court denied the transit anticipatory bail request, clearing the way for the Goa Police to pursue formal arrest procedures.
The case continues to evolve as investigators probe:
- Licensing violations
- Safety compliance
- Possible negligence leading to the tragic loss of 25 lives
Appearance:
The Luthra brothers: Advocates Shiv Chopra, Saud Khan, Vaibhav Suri, Shivaz Berry and Tushan Rawal
The State of Goa: Standing counsel Surjendu Sankar Das, along with advocates Annie Mittal, Archita Nigam and Khushboo Hora