NEW DELHI: The Patiala House Court reserved the order on the anticipatory bail plea of Shubham Tyagi. He has moved the court seeking Anticipatory bail in the Satya Niketan Building Collapse Case. He is stated to be one of the PG operators in the same building that collapsed on September 6.
Seven people lost their lives after a five-storey building collapsed in Satya Niketan on September 6.
Delhi Police want to arrest Shubham Tyagi to interrogate him in this case. For this purpose, the court had extended the police custody of three accused, including Mahesh Gupta and PG Operator Sudhanshu.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) SPS Laler reserved the order on the anticipatory bail plea of Shubham Tyagi after hearing the submissions of his counsel and the Public Prosecutor.
During the arguments, his counsel submitted that Shubham Tyagi is an advocate by profession, having a chamber in Patiala House Court. His name is being dragged in this case for no reason. The police are acting on the media reporting. This case is being a media trial. His name is surfacing in the media every day.
It was also submitted that the alleged construction was not going on in his portion, as he has a separate way for ingress and outgress. He had no knowledge of what was going on in others’ portion and had a presumption about the incident that took place.
The counsel also argued that if, as per the allegations, the building was illegal, has any MCD official been arrested? There are so many buildings in dilapidated condition in the area.
The counsel further submitted that there is no point of arresting him, as all the evidence the police have collected. The rent agreement has been provided by the other accused. The building owners, their son, contractor and Sudhanshu have been arrested. He is ready to co-operate in every manner.
The public prosecutor opposed the bail application, submitting that he requires to be interrogated in connection of this case. He needs to be arrested for the effective investigation of the case.
It is alleged that the PG Operator Shudhanshu, during examination, disclosed that he completed his graduation from Delhi University in the year 2019. Since 2022, he, along with his friend Shubham Tyagi, started operating PG accommodations in the Satya Niketan area under the name and style of “Hostel Daze”. Presently, he is running 07 PGs in the vicinity.
Four floors of the said building were taken on lease by him and Shubham in August 2025, in lieu of ₹ 1.05 lakh per month. They took the building on rent at lower rates due to its dilapidated condition. He remained ignorant towards the construction work going on despite knowing that it could affect the building as a whole.
Patiala House Court on September 9 granted 2 days of police custody to Mahesh Gupta, contractor Sanoj and PG Operator Sudhanshu.
Delhi police sought 3 days of police custody of Mahesh Gupta, contractor Sanoj and PG Operator Sudhanshu.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Kautuk Bhardwaj had granted 2 days’ custody of building owner Mahesh Gupta, Sanoj and Sudhanshu after hearing the custody application of the Delhi police.
Mahesh was produced after 2 days of custody. Sanoj and Sudhanshu were produced after fresh arrest.
Delhi police sought three days’ custody of the accused persons to investigate the case and to arrest another PG Operator, Subham Tyagi.
During the hearing, at the request of counsel for accused Sudhanshu, the court ordered a camera proceeding (closed courtroom).
The counsel had said the case is a media trial. They objected to the presence of the media. Thereafter, the court asked the media to leave the courtroom.
The court had granted 2 days of police custody after hearing the submissions of Delhi police and defence counsel Yashpal Singh.
On September 7, the Duty Magistrate of Patiala House on Monday Night remanded Mahesh Gupta to 2 days of police custody. His parents, Hariram Gupta and Urmila Gupta, have been remanded to judicial custody. They were produced at the residence of the duty magistrate late at night. They have been arrested in connection with the Satya Niketan Building collapse case.
