Mumbai: Actor John Abraham's 15-day jail sentence in a case of rash and negligent driving in 2006 was suspended by the Bombay High Court on Friday. The actor will be let out on bail on a surety of Rs 20,000.
A Mumbai sessions court had dismissed Abraham's plea challenging the 15-day simple imprisonment given to him by a lower court in a case of rash and negligent driving. The court also rejected his plea to grant him time to surrender. Abraham applied in the Bombay High Court for bail.
Upholding his conviction, Sessions Judge N V Navkhar ordered his detention following which he was taken into police custody. The 39-year-old actor had reached the court around 11 AM for the hearing on his plea. The judge also rejected Abraham's plea seeking time to surrender before the trial court.
He later moved the Bombay High Court against the sessions court order and sought bail.
On October 14, 2010, the Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Bandra convicted him for the rash driving incident in which two persons were injured, and sentenced him to a 15-day jail term. He was granted bail the same day. A fortnight later, the model-actor filed an appeal in the Sessions Court against the conviction. His appeal stated that "judge has misconstrued and has, without applying the principles relating to the acts of rashness and criminal negligence, convicted the applicant (John)".
The incident dates back to April 8, 2006, when Abraham allegedly rammed his Yamaha Hayabusa bike into a bicycle, injuring two youngsters - Shyam Kasbe (22) and Tanmay Majhi (19) - on Carter Road in suburban Bandra. According to police, the actor was returning from Maureen Wadia's Gladrags show while both the youngsters were returning after closing their shop.
The police later booked him under IPC Sections 279 (rash driving or riding on a public way) and 337 (causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others). According to John's application, even the victims "had not made out a case of either criminal negligence or rashness" against him.
"The lower court has relied upon hearsay evidence in convicting the appellant (John)," the appeal had said. (With additional information from PTI)
Comments
0 comment