Panaji: A court in Goa on Monday granted regular bail to Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra, two accused in a case involving the alleged manipulation of a Health Department no-objection certificate (NOC) to obtain an excise licence for an establishment.
The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), ‘E’ Court, Mapusa, passed separate orders allowing the second regular bail applications filed by the two accused in a case registered at Mapusa police station.
The case was registered on December 13, 2025, following a complaint by Dr Roshan Nazareth, Health Officer at the Primary Health Centre, Candolim. The accused allegedly manipulated a Health NOC issued to another establishment and submitted it as genuine before the Excise Department to obtain an excise licence for their establishment, Birch by Romeo Lane, in Arpora, North Goa.
The issue came to light after the nightclub caught fire in December 2025, killing 25 people.
The two accused were arrested on March 30, 2026, and were initially granted bail by the JMFC on April 8. However, the Bombay High Court set aside the bail orders on August 18 and directed them to surrender. The Supreme Court subsequently dismissed their challenges on August 31, granting them an additional two weeks to surrender. Both accused surrendered on September 14 and were remanded to judicial custody.
In their fresh bail applications, the accused contended that the charge-sheet did not establish their personal involvement in preparing or altering the allegedly forged NOC or knowingly submitting it as genuine. They argued that the documentation for obtaining the excise licence had been handled by co-accused Dinesh Khera, while Gauresh Gawas was responsible for uploading the documents.
They also submitted that the investigation had been completed, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the evidence was documentary and electronic in nature. They contended that their continued custody was unnecessary and that they had not misused their liberty during the approximately five months they remained on bail.
Opposing the applications, the prosecution argued that the material collected during the investigation prima facie indicated the accused’s involvement in the alleged forgery and use of the NOC. It also raised concerns about the possibility of witnesses being influenced and the accused evading trial.
In its orders, the court noted that the Bombay High Court had previously examined the material and expressed a prima facie opinion regarding the allegations. It clarified that its decision to grant bail did not amount to a finding on the guilt or innocence of the accused, which would be determined during the trial.
The court observed that no specific instance of the accused influencing witnesses, tampering with evidence or violating bail conditions during their earlier period of liberty had been brought on record. It also took into account the completion of the investigation and their subsequent surrender in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
While acknowledging concerns arising from their earlier departure to Thailand, the court held that apprehensions regarding witness influence and absconding could be addressed through stringent conditions.
The court directed each accused to execute a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh with two sureties of the same amount. They have been barred from leaving India without prior written permission from the court and from contacting or influencing prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
The accused have also been directed to remain personally present on the first three consecutive dates of hearing after their release, cooperate with the trial, furnish their residential addresses and active mobile numbers, and comply with other conditions. The prosecution may seek cancellation of bail in the event of any breach.
The accused face charges under Sections 419, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 475, 420, 120-B and 201, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
