Published 00:34 IST, May 23rd 2024
Arnab Confronts Pune Top Cop In Porsche Killer Case: 5 Biggest Headlines
Pune top cop Amitesh Kumar admits NCP 'MLA visited the police station at 7 AM, can't stop him'. Read 5 biggest headlines from the heated debate.

New Delhi: In the aftermath of the Pune Porsche crash, Republic Media Network's Editor-in-Chief Arnab Goswami took an active role in ensuring justice for the victims. During a live TV debate, Arnab Goswami confronted Pune Police Commissioner Amitesh Kumar with some hard-hitting questions regarding the case's handling. Arnab specifically questioned why an NCP MLA visited the police station after the incident and why two blood samples of the ‘super rich brat’ (17-year-old accused) were taken.
In response to Arnab's direct questions, Commissioner Amitesh Kumar made startling admissions that exposed procedural irregularity and political interference in the investigation. These revelations have given a new twist to the ongoing probe of the case, raising questions about the integrity and transparency of the investigation process.
In this article, Republic World will explore the five biggest headlines from Arnab's confrontation with Pune Police Commissioner Amitesh Kumar. The intense live TV debate brought to the forefront several critical issues in the case's handling that have remained unanswered until now.
Arnab Confronts Pune Top Cop In Porsche Killer Case: 5 Biggest Headlines
- NCP 'MLA visited the police station at 7 AM, can't stop him', Admits Pune top cop Amitesh Kumar
"He (NCP MLA) did visit the police station", Amitesh Kumar admitted. When Arnab asked, "Why did he (MLA) visit? Why was he entertained?" Amitesh responded by saying, "I cannot comment. He was not entertained at all."
- 2 Blood Samples Were Taken, 3-4 hours Apart at Two Different Hospitals
“Now two issues on the blood report: Yes two blood samples were collected as a matter of precaution. Just in case, if one blood report gets tampered with, we have the other one with us. Let me explain our legal position. Here we are not making out a case of 304A IPC which is a bailable offence with a 3-year punishment where we say that rash and negligence act, that he was deeply, heavily drunk under the influence of liquor, and he did not have the knowledge that this act will lead to the death of people”, Pune top cop to Arnab.
- Pune Top Cop Admits Super Rich Grandfather Had A 2009 Case Where MCOCA Charges Weren't Applied
Arnab asked the Police Commissioner, “Is it true or not that the grandfather of this Super Rich Brat has worked with Chhota Rajan in the past to carry out the killing of a corporator?” Yes, the case is on record against him,” admitted the Police Commissioner of Pune.
“Is it true that the MCOCA or the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act’s provisions were not applied against the Super Rich Grandfather of the Super Rich Boy?” Arnab further questioned. “Yes, in 2009 when the offence had taken place and the investigation was done…it was not applied,” admitted the Police Commissioner.
- Court Rejected Both Our Applications to Try The Accused as an Adult
“It was unfortunate and unacceptable to us that the court had rejected both our applications of trying him as an adult and allowing him to go out on bail, despite our efforts that he must be sent to the remand home and he should be tried as an adult”, Kumar claimed.
- Long Rope Was Not Given to The Accused
“It is wrong to say that a long rope was given to the boy. You must understand that whatever best was possible was applied. "There is no truth in the fact that a long rope was given”, Amitesh Kumar told Arnab.
Viewers Hail Arnab
After confronting Pune Police Commissioner Amitesh Kumar, Arnab spoke to his viewers, who praised him for uncovering the critical issues. His incisive questions and persistent pursuit of truth were lauded for bringing much-needed transparency and accountability to the investigation. "You are doing a great job. Proud of you", olonel Mishra from Bhubaneswar hailed Arnab for his confrontation with Pune Police Commissioner.
Pune Porsche Killer Case: What Happened So Far
After facing flak over quick bail, the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) remanded a 17-year-old boy to an observation home till June 5. While the police said that the JJB on Wednesday evening cancelled the bail granted to the minor three days ago, his lawyer claimed that there was no cancellation of bail. There was no order yet on the police's application seeking permission to treat him as an adult accused. The JJB had on Sunday granted bail to the teenager hours after the Porsche car allegedly driven by him knocked down and killed two IT professionals in their 20s on a motorbike. It also asked him to write a 300-word essay on road accidents, an order that drew an onslaught of criticism.
Advocate Prashant Patil, who represented the juvenile at the JJB hearing, said the bail granted on Sunday has not been cancelled. "It is a modification of the earlier order....Cancellation of bail means setting aside the earlier order and taking the person in custody. Here, it is not a custody. It is a rehab home," he told reporters.
According to advocate Patil, the process of deciding whether a juvenile should be treated as an adult accused can take at least two months as reports of psychiatrists and counsellors among others are called for, and then the JJB gives its decision. Police have registered an FIR against the minor under IPC sections 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 304 A (causing death by negligence), 279 (rash driving) and relevant sections of the Motor Vehicles Act.
As per the police, he was drunk at the time.
The sessions court earlier on Wednesday remanded Vishal Agarwal (50), the minor's father, and two employees of Hotel Black Club, Nitesh Shevani and Jayesh Gavkar, in police custody till May 24.
The teenager, before the accident, had allegedly consumed alcohol at Hotel Black Club.
Police registered a case against his father under sections 75 and 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act, and against the owner and employees of two bars which the boy had visited before Sunday's accident for `serving alcohol to an underage person.' Section 75 deals with "willful neglect of a child, or exposing a child to mental or physical illnesses," while section 77 deals with supplying a child with intoxicating liquor or drugs.
What Does The FIR Say?
According to the FIR, the real estate developer gave his son the car despite knowing that the boy did not have a driving license, thus endangering his life, and allowed him to party even while knowing that he drinks alcohol.
The prosecution demanded police custody of seven days for Agarwal and the other two, stating that the police wanted to investigate why Agarwal allowed his son to drive the car which did not have a number plate. The real estate developer was arrested from Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar on Tuesday.
Political Slugfest Continues
Political slugfest over the accident continued on Wednesday with Maharashtra deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis stating that it did not "behove" Congress leader Rahul Gandhi to "politicise" the incident.
Commenting on the accident, Gandhi had said if an ordinary truck or cab driver were to cause it, he would be jailed for years, but there was different justice for the son of a rich man, and Congress wanted to change this system.
Fadnavis said the police responded to the situation in the right way.
Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Ambadas Danve, on the other hand, asked whether Fadnavis's visit to Pune following the car crash was aimed at shielding the investigative agencies. Fadnavis, who hold the home portfolio, visited Pune only after there was an uproar on social media over the incident, Danve claimed.
Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi leader Prakash Ambedkar claimed that police spent more time asking questions about the relationship between the two IT professionals who were killed.
In a post on X, Ambedkar said, "Officers at Yerawada police station spent more time questioning the relationship between Anish and Ashwini...while the accused was allegedly served burger and pizza." As per the controversial bail order passed by the Juvenile Justice Board hours after the incident on Sunday, the teenager's grandfather had "given an assurance that he will keep the Child-in-Conflict with Law (CCL) away from any bad company and he will concentrate on his study or any vocational course which is useful for his career." "The CCL will write an essay of 300 words on the topic of road accidents and their solutions," the order said, eliciting much acerbic commentary on social media.
Updated 01:20 IST, May 23rd 2024