15 July 2025 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law  

The Delhi High Court has granted regular bail to Sachin Tinku in connection with FIR No. 777/2023, registered at Police Station Alipur, Delhi. The case involves charges under Sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.

The incident, which occurred on November 10, 2023, involved a firing incident near Fitness Freaks Gym, Alipur, resulting in a gunshot injury to victim Piyush Mann. While the initial statement by the victim did not name assailants, a supplementary statement identified Rahul, Rohit Laddu, Chetan, and the petitioner, Sachin Tinku, as alleged members of the Tillu Tajpuria gang. The victim specifically stated that shots were fired by Rohit Laddu and Chetan, with the petitioner, Sachin Tinku, arriving at the scene after the firing had taken place.

Sachin Tinku was arrested on November 13, 2023, and a country-made pistol and live cartridges were recovered from his possession, though these were not identified as the weapon used in the offense.

Key arguments for bail:

• The petitioner's counsel argued that Sachin Tinku was falsely implicated and did not fire any shots.
• The victim was declared fit for a statement on the day of the incident, suggesting the injury, though later classified as "dangerous," might not warrant continued incarceration.
• The chargesheet has been filed, eliminating the need for further custodial interrogation.
• The petitioner has been in judicial custody for nearly 1 year and 8 months, and the trial is expected to be lengthy.
• The petitioner has a clean criminal record.
• The petitioner's wife is pregnant and in an unstable medical condition, requiring his presence at home.

The prosecution opposed bail, citing the petitioner's alleged association with the Tillu Tajpuria gang, the recovery of a weapon from him, and Call Detail Records (CDR) placing him near the scene and in contact with co-accused. The prosecution also expressed concern about potential tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses if bail were granted before charges were framed.

The Court's Decision:

After reviewing the submissions and records, the Court noted that the specific role attributed to Sachin Tinku was his arrival at the scene after the firing incident, and he was not alleged to be one of the main assailants who caused the gunshot injury. Crucially, the weapon used in the offense was not recovered at his instance. The Court also highlighted the petitioner's clean antecedents and satisfactory jail conduct.

Considering these factors, the Court granted regular bail to Sachin Tinku on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 30,000 with one surety of the like amount. The bail is subject to several conditions, including:

• Not leaving the NCT of Delhi without prior court permission.
• Reporting to P.S. Alipur once a week.
• Informing the court and IO of any change in residential address.
• Appearing before the trial court for hearings.
• Keeping his mobile number operational and providing it to the IO.
• Not contacting or influencing prosecution witnesses.
• Not tampering with evidence or prejudicing the trial.

The Court clarified that its observations are solely for the purpose of bail consideration and do not reflect on the merits of the case.

Section 34., Indian Penal Code - 1860

Section 307., Indian Penal Code - 1860

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 25, Arms Act - 1959

Section 27, Arms Act - 1959

Arms Act, 1959