KISAN SINGH vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Crl.A. No. 2242/2009
Case under Section II-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010262162008
Filing Date
09-Sep-2008
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 2242/2009
Diary Number
26216/2008
Order Date
19-Sep-2013
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KISAN SINGH
Adv. RAVI PRAKASH MEHROTRA (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Adv. ASHA GOPALAN NAIR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
19-Sep-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Apr-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Feb-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Sep-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Jul-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Apr-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Jan-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Dec-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Jan-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Jan-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Nov-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Oct-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Oct-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
13-Sep-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
23-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Oct-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Sep-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Apr-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
31-Mar-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Feb-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-Sep-2008
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 2242/2009
Case Summary: Kisan Singh v. State of Maharashtra (Crl.A. 2242/2009) The Supreme Court dismissed Kisan Singh's criminal appeal on September 19, 2013, upholding his life imprisonment conviction for murder under IPC Section 302 read with Section 34 (common intention). Singh was convicted of exhorting co-accused Gurumitsing to kill victim Ashok Mahalley by saying "Nikal ke Mar Sale Ko" (take him out and kill him). The Court found that three eyewitnesses who were present at the incident, two of whom sustained injuries, provided credible testimony establishing Singh's presence and his role in the murder. Both the trial court and High Court had carefully evaluated the evidence and minor discrepancies in witness testimonies were deemed immaterial, as they did not undermine the prosecution's proof of common intention among the accused. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the lower courts' judgments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts