The big wait is finally over. In a huge relief for Bollywood superstar Salman Khan, the Bombay High Court has acquitted him of all charges in the 2002 hit-and-run case. The accident that took place on September 28, 2002 allegedly left one pavement dweller dead and four others injured.
While dictating the order in the 2002 hit-and-run case in which Bollywood superstar Salman Khan was made accused, the Bombay High Court on Thursday said that it is the considered view of the court that the prosecution has failed to establish its case on all charges.
The court said that considering various shortcomings of the prosecution, the omissions and contradictions in evidence of injured witnesses which go to root of matter, doubt arises over the involvement of appellant accused. The court said that the appellant cannot be convicted on the basis of the given evidence.
The court pointed out that investigation into the case was conducted in a faulty manner with scant regard to procedures laid down. "Procedure required chain of evidence when case is based on biological evidence. There were some loose ends in the investigation and the benefit is required to be given in favour of the accused. It is duty of the court to sift evidence and see that offences are proved against accused beyond reasonable doubt."
"Considered view of this court is that appreciation done by the trial court is not proper and legal as per criminal jurisprudence. The trial court erred in accepting the bills recovered without panchnama."
The Bombay HC also said that it is a well settled principle that court must decide the case on material brought on record and which can be brought as evidence as per procedure laid down by law. The court shall not get swayed that a particular person because of his status or profession must have committed the offence or must be held guilty.
"The court is expected to be impervious of pressure from public and media. It is for good reason that law of evidence has no place for general public opinion to be a factor while deciding a case. The perception of truth in public is required to be proved before a court of law and in which the established principles of law and evidence must be adhered to. Even the cardinal principle of jurisprudence and burden of prosecution must not be forgotten and any strong suspicion cannot be considered as material to convict a person. Bearing this in mind, it is the considered view of this court that prosecution has failed to establish its case on all charges," the court said.
Prosecution had claimed that Salman had allegedly consumed liquor at 'Rain Bar and Restaurant' in Vile Parle before ramming his Toyota Lexus car into a shop at suburban Bandra. Those killed and injured were sleeping outside the shop. But the Bombay High Court ruled that evidence of the injured is not devoid of discrepancies and the prosecution failed to prove truthfulness of the witness who claimed Salman Khan was drunk.
"The witness testified that Salman Khan was drunk which led him to falling down twice on accident spot before he fled. Prosecution star witness Ravindra Patil should not have lost sight of Salman’s alleged heavy drinking in his FIR on September 28, 2012 (the day of incident). The concept of alcohol comes up in investigation only on October 1, 2012, according to the verdict.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
