'Singham is reminiscent of Singham', why did the Supreme Court comment on the shooting at the Maharashtra police station -remarks about the Supreme Court on 2024 Maharashtra police station firing says reminiscent of Singham

Updated: Di, 09 Sep 2025 02:31 am (IST) The Supreme Court while hearing a petition against an order from the Bombay High Court, the incident of shooting at the Ulhasnagar police station reminded him of the Hindi film Singham. A Bank of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said this incident is so cinematic that a separate film can be made on it. Digital Desk, New -Delhi. The Supreme Court has a petition against the Bombay High Court order that did not grant bail to the accused in a case related to the shooting incident at the police station, said the case reminded him of the Hindi film ‘Singham’. Remove the ad just read the news was to hear the petition of Kunal Dilip Patil, accused of firing former BJP Mla Ganpat Gaikwad at the former corporation and Shiv Sena leader Mahesh Gaikwad at the Ulhasnagar police station in Maharashtra last year at the Ulhasnagar Maharashtra. Patil is accused of stopping Mahesh Gaikwad’s bodyguard during the shooting. “A separate film can be made,” it is said that the shooting occurred due to old enmity and land dispute between two leaders. The bank said this incident is so cogent that it can make a screenplay of a separate film. Justice Mehta said: “It reminds us of the movie ‘Singham’. It’s a story that can also be a tagline.” Patil’s lawyer, Siddharth Dave, laughed at this that such a story could also become a film in a few years. The court asked the government to reply to the government that his client was not in the cabin from which the BJP leader fired and that he was not even mentioned in the original fir. He further said that the role of Patil was similar to other co -accused, who received bail in this case. The court issued a notice to the Maharashtra government on the bail of the accused and sought an answer. Also read: ‘Munna Bhai should live within’, the Supreme Court has the use of proxy candidates in Ctet reprimanded