Mumbai: The much-awaited verdict in the 2002 hit-and-run case involving bollywood actor Salman Khan will be pronounced on Thursday. The Bombay High Court has said that according to the law, the appellant accused Salman Khan should be present while verdict is pronounced.
Salman's lawyers have said that security is required while bringing the appellant accused to the court. The lawyers have told the court that Salman Khan will be present in court between 1 pm to 1:30 pm. The verdict is likely to be announced on Thursday afternoon. Meanwhile, Salman Khan's sister Alvira has reached the court for the proceedings.
The Bombay HC said that it is the considered view of the court that prosecution has failed to establish its case on all charges. The court has been reading out detailed observations in the day in the course of the past two days.
It had observed that the prosecution has not been able 'to prove beyond reasonable doubt' that the actor was driving the car or was under the influence of alcohol on September 28, 2002, when the vehicle met with an accident.
Justice AR Joshi also said it was difficult to rely on the testimony of the late Ravindra Patil, the police bodyguard assigned to Salman who was in the vehicle that night when the vehicle mowed down one pavement dweller and injured four others in Bandra West.
The court also observed that in his police statement recorded hours after the accident, Patil made no mention about Salman being drunk, but said this only on October 1, 2002, after the blood sample tests reports were received.
"Because of anomalies and discrepancies in his statement, Patil cannot be called 'wholly reliable' as he improved upon this statement from recording of FIR to his supplementary statement (on October 1, 2002) in magistrate's court," the judge said.
Besides, the judge noted that the prosecution has not been able to establish whether the incident occurred due to bursting of the vehicle tyre prior to the accident or whether the tyre burst after the incident.
Justice Joshi pointed out that police inspector Kishan Shengal, the case investigating officer, did not send the tyre for forensic examination, that too when forensic experts had visited the police station to inspect the car. "If that would have done, then definitely it would have been able to ascertain the cause of burst of left front wheel tyre," he added.
Terming Patil 'an unreliable witness', the judge noted that it was difficult to accept his answers that the car tyre 'burst due to the impact' (of the crash).
"This court has come to the conclusion, that the prosecution has failed to bring material on record to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant-accused (Salman) was driving (the vehicle) and driving under influence of alcohol, and also, whether the accident occurred due to bursting (of tyre) prior to the incident or tyre burst after the incident," Justice Joshi said.
The judge also said "necessary adverse inference" needs to be drawn for the prosecution withholding actor-singer Kamaal Khan - who was present in the vehicle and a witness - from coming to the witness box, and said only "an apparent futile attempt was made to bring him".
Comments
0 comment