Tiger Shroff firing case: Defence questions weapon trail

A metropolitan magistrate court in Mumbai on Thursday (October 22, 2026) remanded four accused, including two women, arrested in connection with the October 18 firing at Bollywood actor Tiger Shroff’s car in Juhu, in police custody till October 26. The Mumbai Crime Branch police had sought their custody till October 31 to investigate their alleged role in procuring and supplying the firearm used in the attack.The four accused are: Kunal Singh, 21, from Rohana village in Haryana’s Sonipat district; Sumit Sorolia, 19, from Kharkhoda in Sonipat; Radha Verma, 23, from Sitapur in Uttar Pradesh; and Babita Rao, 23, from Azamgarh in Uttar Pradesh. They were arrested by the Delhi Police Special Cell on October 20 and subsequently brought to Mumbai on transit remand.During the hearing, the prosecution alleged that the four were part of a conspiracy to supply weapons to the alleged shooters. According to the police’s case, Kunal and Sumit were allegedly involved in procuring the firearm, while Radha and Babita allegedly helped supply it to the assailants.Extended custody soughtSeeking extended custody, the prosecution submitted that the case involved serious offences, including attempt to murder, and that the investigation was at an initial stage. The prosecutor argued that custodial interrogation, including questioning the accused together, was necessary to establish the wider conspiracy. The weapon used in the attack was yet to be recovered.Opposing the application, defence advocate Sachin Patil questioned the evidence linking the accused to the alleged weapon supply chain, arguing that investigators had not even established the make or type of pistol used in the firing.“They are not being able to identify the make of this pistol! Whether it was Indian-made, whether it was foreign-made... Nothing of that sort has been identified,” Mr. Patil submitted.He further argued that investigators had not produced concrete material, including statements from co-accused, to justify the arrests.“Before effecting the arrest of a person, there has to be some material, concrete material on record. There is not even a statement of a co-accused,” Mr. Patil argued, questioning the grounds for implicating the two women.The defence also questioned the absence of any reference to payment or financial consideration for the alleged weapon supply in the remand application. Mr. Patil argued that the accused had already been questioned during their three-day transit remand and that their physical custody was unnecessary for examining call detail records and other electronic evidence.Advocate Ajinkya Mirgal, representing Radha and Babita, submitted that his clients were not present at the scene of the firing and that there was nothing further to recover from them.“There is no motive behind it, so no conspiracy,” Mr. Mirgal argued, urging the court to send the accused directly to judicial custody.Speaking to reporters after the hearing, the defence lawyers said investigators had already seized mobile phones and wanted to examine them for evidence of the alleged communication trail. They maintained that forensic examination of the devices did not require continued police custody.The lawyers also confirmed that the court had asked the four accused whether they had any complaints against the police, to which they replied in the negative.After hearing both sides, the magistrate granted police custody of all four accused till October 26.The latest remand follows Wednesday’s proceedings, when three other accused, Rehan alias Sukka, Phool Singh and Ritik Kurmi alias Roshan, were remanded in police custody till October 31. The trio had been arrested in Kota, Rajasthan, in connection with the firing.The October 18 attack took place in Juhu when the assailants allegedly opened fire at Mr. Shroff’s car. The actor escaped unhurt, while his driver and a bystander sustained injuries.