NT Reporter
Mapusa
The JMFC court, Mapusa, on Wednesday granted conditional bail to Saurabh Luthra and Gaurav Luthra, co-owners of the fire-ravaged nightclub Birch by Romeo Lane, in the alleged forgery of health NOC.
JMFC court judge Jude T Sequeira pronounced the order in the open court granting bail to the brothers against the personal bond of Rs 1 lakh each and two local sureties of Rs 50,000 each.
The Luthra brothers walked out of the Central Jail, Colvale, in the evening after the completion of bail proceedings. They walked out of the jail three and half months after their arrest.
The court imposed various conditions including four days’ police reporting, reporting on fourth Saturday of the month till the filing of the chargesheet.
The court also imposed conditions, like applicants can’t tamper with evidence or threaten prosecution witnesses and the complainant, that they shall not abscond or leave the country, and they shall cooperate with the investigating officer.
The Luthra brothers were arrested in the Birch fire tragedy, which claimed 25 lives in December 2025. They were brought back to India as they had fled to Phuket, Thailand, after the inferno.
On April 1 the Mapusa court granted them conditional bail in the fire case. However, they were arrested by the Mapusa police over the alleged forgery of the health NOC so as to get an excise licence.
On Wednesday, the court while granting bail observed, “The prosecution has not produced any material to prima facie show that applicant is the maker of the document. Mere being a partner of the aforesaid LLP cannot prime facie make the applicant the maker of the forged NOC. The aspect whether the accused is a maker of NOC or not, on the basis of being a partner of aforesaid LLP will have to be tested at the time of the trial. Therefore, for want of direct evidence/material that the applicant was the maker of the NOC, the accused is entitled for the bail.”
Over the issue of valuable security, the court said the alleged NOC, according to the prosecution, was a requirement to get an excise licence.
The Excise Department may or may not grant licence to sell liquor considering the alleged forged NOC. It is only a qualification or required document to grant an excise licence
The JMFC court also added, “The NOC does not in any manner prima facie show that there is a creation of any right in favour of LLP to sell liquor and prima facie would not create any right in favour of LLP to sell liquor as same can be carried out only after obtaining permission from the Excise Department. Therefore I am of the prima facie view that the alleged NOC cannot be termed as valuable security. The alleged NOC which is forged is NOC from a sanitary point of view to run the restaurant.”
