ARTICLE AD BOX
![]()
GOA: The return of Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra, co-owners of Goa’s ‘Birch by Romeo Lane’ nightclub, could face delays primarily because their passports have been cancelled. Detained by Thai police in Phuket on Thursday at the request of Indian authorities after fleeing India following the nightclub fire that claimed 25 lives, the brothers will require an Emergency Travel Certificate from the Indian Embassy to facilitate their deportation.

Sources said they may be taken to Bangkok to complete the process, and if the documentation is not completed by Friday, the deportation could be further delayed due to the weekend and non-working days.A team has already been sent to Phuket to coordinate the deportation. Meanwhile, a court on Thursday denied their transit anticipatory bail, noting that the “nature of offence, prima facie, is grave and serious” and highlighting the loss of 25 lives. The court also rejected the brothers’ claims of immediate threat to their lives and dismissed old medical records submitted to show seizure disorder and hypertension, observing that the conditions were not a barrier to travel or business. As pointed out by Goa Police, the nightclub was being operated on a trade licence issued by a panchayat, which expired in 2023. Another factor was the flight tickets booked on Dec 7 at 1.17am, “just five hours after the Goa accident”, despite the claim that the brothers had left India on Dec 6 for “scheduled business meetings”.
The court treated this as “concealment of a material fact”. The state submitted that when police reached the Luthras’ Delhi residence with an arrest warrant, their mother refused to disclose their whereabouts.The court said the applicants had also failed to show as in why they didn’t approach “the competent court having territorial jurisdiction in Goa”, despite being admittedly in Thailand’s Phuket for now.Represented by senior advocates Abhinav Mukerji and Atul Srivastav, the state of Goa had argued that the brothers had “deliberately fled India” and could not seek protection while evading investigation. “Once it is shown that a person is attempting to evade the process of law, the court should not come to his aid at all,” the state said.

English (US) ·