Goa Nightclub Fire: Delhi Court Reserves Order on Luthra Brothers’ Anticipatory Bail

During the hearing, the Goa Police strongly opposed the brothers’ plea, arguing that both Gaurav and Saurabh Luthra, along with partner Ajay Gupta, were signatories of the establishment and that the Panchayat licence for the club had expired and was never renewed. The prosecution said the brothers had shown “no cooperation”, which disentitled them to the “extraordinary protection” of anticipatory bail.

The police further alleged that the brothers misled both the Court and authorities about their travel. While they claimed they left India on the night of December 6, immigration records showed they flew out on December 7. The counsel submitted that the Luthras fled the country, misrepresented facts and fabricated medical grounds, noting that the alleged medical patient was never examined by a doctor.

Senior Advocate Tanvir Ahmed, appearing for the brothers, countered that the FIR itself attributes the incident to negligence rather than homicidal intent. He argued that the applicants faced threats and were seeking protection of life, adding that “a man before the court is not an absconder”. He said no notice to join investigation was issued before a warrant was obtained and that the Luthras were prepared to participate in the probe.

He further submitted that the brothers oversee 40 restaurants across India and cannot physically be present at each premises. Their travel to Phuket, he said, was for a pre-scheduled event, not an attempt to evade the law. He contended that arrests “cannot be made in rage or vengeance”.

Meanwhile in Goa, their partner Ajay Gupta was produced before the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Mapusa and remanded to seven days’ police custody. The Luthra brothers, detained in Thailand earlier this week, are expected to be deported to India for further investigation into the fatal blaze.

Notably,on Wednesday i.e. December 10, the accused had sought four weeks of transit anticipatory bail so that they are not immediately arrested after their return to Delhi from Thailand. At the outset, Mukherji objected to the pleas, stating they were served only this morning, and sought a hearing on Friday so the prosecution could file a status report. He said the applicants were “fugitives” and argued that the pleas were not maintainable.

Luthra countered that the only relief sought was limited protection to allow the brothers to return to India and approach the proper courts in Goa. He stressed that while the incident was tragic, the accused were being subjected to “witch hunting”. He also pointed to Saurabh Luthra’s medical history, including hypertension and epilepsy.

Bench: Additional Sessions Judge Vandana

Hearing Date: December 11, 2025