Unacceptable: Supreme Court Slams Pinnelli Brothers for Accessing Case Diary, Orders Surrender

The Bench questioned how the accused managed to procure such sensitive investigation material at this stage of the probe.

The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta heard the anticipatory bail pleas and expressed strong displeasure over what it termed a clear instance of tampering.

“Go back to jail. Your custodial interrogation is necessary,” Justice Sandeep Mehta remarked, adding, “We are amazed by the reach the accused has. How did you get the case diary? This is unacceptable.”

Senior Advocates Siddharth Dave and Shoeb Alam appeared for the Pinnelli brothers. Counsel for the complainant raised a preliminary objection to the filing of a Section 161 CrPC statement by the accused, flagging the irregular access to investigation documents.

The defence argued that the material had been obtained through legitimate means, but the court dismissed the explanation.

Calling the situation “tampering, plain and simple,” Justice Mehta observed that the case diary appeared to have been “served on a platter.”

Finding no grounds to grant protection, the Supreme Court dismissed the anticipatory bail applications of both accused and granted them two weeks to surrender.