Advocate Shubham Tyagi, who had been evading arrest in the Satya Niketan building collapse case, surrendered before the Patiala House Court on Friday, a day after his anticipatory bail plea was rejected. The Delhi Police has sought two days of custodial interrogation of Tyagi and co-accused Sudhanshu Lovenish Kumar, who is associated with the operation of the paying-guest (PG) facility in the building.
Tyagi’s surrender came after Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Partap Singh Laler on Thursday dismissed his anticipatory bail plea, observing that material gathered during the investigation prima facie contradicted his claim that he was only an investor in the PG business.
The court noted that a separate rent agreement showed Tyagi as a co-lessee of the second and third floors of Building No. 14 at Satya Niketan Market in Moti Bagh-II, where the boys’ PG was being run.
The building collapsed on September 6, killing seven people, including five students and two labourers. Several others were injured in the incident.
The FIR was registered at South Campus Police Station under Sections 105, 290 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), initially against unidentified persons.
As the investigation progressed, police arrested building owners Urmila Gupta, Hari Ram Gupta and Mahesh Gupta alias Sanjay, contractor Sanoj and PG operator Sudhanshu Lovenish Kumar.
Tyagi had told the court that he was an advocate practising at the Patiala House Courts, had no criminal antecedents and was only an investor in the PG business run by his friend Lovenish Kumar.
He had also argued that he neither owned the building nor had any control over its structure or any role in decisions concerning it.
However, the prosecution placed before the court a rent agreement dated September 6, 2025, executed between building owner Urmila Gupta and Tyagi for the second and third floors of the building.
The court observed that the agreement had been executed on the same day as another rent agreement relied upon by Tyagi and contained substantially similar terms. Both agreements were also attested by the same notary.
The court further noted that Tyagi had signed Lovenish Kumar’s agreement as a witness, while Lovenish Kumar had similarly signed Tyagi’s agreement.
Another important piece of evidence cited by the court was the statement of injured PG resident Nitish Chib. He said he had taken accommodation from Tyagi and Lovenish Kumar and was paying Rs 14,500 per month.
According to Chib’s statement, construction work had been going on in the basement for around 10 to 12 days before the collapse. Iron rods were also being cut on the ground floor.
The students had reportedly objected to the construction noise. Tyagi and Lovenish Kumar then told them that renovation work was being carried out and that the PG would be extended to the basement.
The court said Chib’s statement was relevant at the anticipatory bail stage while examining Tyagi’s claim that he was unaware of the construction work and was only financially involved in the business.
At the same time, the court made it clear that it was not giving any final finding on whether the offence under Section 105 of the BNS, relating to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, was ultimately made out against Tyagi.
It also observed that the investigation was still at an early stage. Several issues, including the extent of the partnership between Tyagi and Lovenish Kumar, the flow of rent collected from students, and what the accused knew about or consented to regarding the structural work, remained to be investigated.
The Satya Niketan collapse also led to proceedings before the Delhi High Court over alleged regulatory and municipal lapses. The High Court subsequently directed inspections of PG accommodations amid concerns over the safety of such establishments in the national capital.
With Tyagi’s surrender, police are now seeking his custodial interrogation along with that of Lovenish Kumar as the investigation into the collapse continues.
