Problems and Salman Khan go hand in hand.
The Bombay High Court has begun its dictation of the verdict on the appeal of the actor's 2002 hit and run case. Coming out of this prolonged trial seems a tough row to hoe!
The dictation of the judgement went on stating, "The FIR is silent on the issue of the drunkenness of the appellant...This omission of witness cannot be considered as minor," said Justice A R Joshi in the open court. He further said, "The issue of drunkenness of Salman Khan has to be critically examined as the evidence of those injured in the accident is not devoid of minor discrepancies."
The court is expected to conclude the verdict by this week in the appeal filed by Khan against the five-year imprisonment awarded to him by a Mumbai sessions court on May 6 this year.
Drawing the references, the Judge revealed that witness Mannu Khan must have found Salman to be drunk because he fell down twice after getting down from the car at the accident spot, then got up and left the place. Justice Joshi said that PW-3 -Mannu Khan, has been examined 12 years after the incident." He (PW-3) has to be viewed in juxtaposition with the FIR."
The Judge also said he will give a ruling on applicability of culpable homicide charge against Salman and also on other prime questions like the admissibility of a statement made by the actor's former bodyguard, Ravindra Patil before a magistrate, as evidence under section 33 of Indian Evidence Act.
Salman in his defence had said, that the charge of culpable homicide was not justified in the case. He had also challenged the prosecution of relying upon Patil's statement in the trial court considering this witness died and hence was not available for cross-examination. The prosecution then opposed Salman's plea and justified invocation of culpable homicide charge against the actor, saying he drove the car carelessly that too under the influence of liquor on September 28, 2002.
The prosecution had argued that the actor had taken alcoholic drinks at Rain Bar and Restaurant at Vile Parle before meeting with the mishap in suburban Bandra. Though Salman has denied the charge saying evidence does not suggest this.
The Judge assured that in the verdict he will also look upon on issues such as why Kamaal Khan, the singer-friend of Salman who was with the actor in his car on the incident day was not examined all this while. The HC had earlier rejected Salman's plea to examine Kamaal Khan as witness.
The Judge further said that the other issue he would touch on in his verdict would be on the improvement made by late Ravindra Patil in his statement before a magistrate. Initially, in the FIR filed by Patil, he had not said anything against Salman. However later, in a Magistrate's court, he gave a statement saying the actor was drunk and was driving recklessly and in great speed.
The Judge today, relied upon the prosecution's claim and defence's version on four injured persons- Muslim Niyamat Shaikh, Mannu Khan, Mohammed Salim Iqbal Pathan and Mohammed Adullah Shaikh. The court also referred to testimony Kalpesh Varma, a parking attendant at J. W. Marriot Hotel where Salman had gone before he met with the mishap.
The Judge also mentioned the version of one of the eye witnesses; Ram Asare Pande who was at the accident spot as Pande had said that he had seen four persons; the actor, his police bodyguard and two other persons.
Bajrangi Bhaijaan actor, had been convicted on the charges of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under IPC and other offences on May 6th this year. He then had filed an appeal in the High Court which granted him bail before hearing arguments in the case.On 28th September 2002, accused Salman Khan had rammed his Toyota Lexus car into a Bandra shop, killing one person and injuring the four others. He has been charged of consuming liquor and driving which led to the accident.
Watch this space for further updates on this story!