Salman gets major HC reprieve, free for now
Mumbai Mirror Bureau
Justice Thipsay tells the actor to seek permission before travelling abroad, pay monthly visit to Bandra police station.
Actor Salman Khan could remain free for a considerable length of time even if the Bombay High Court only rules partially in his favour.
The only impediment Salman faces is that he will have to seek the HC’s permission before travelling abroad and appear before the Bandra police once a month.
“Normally, if the sentence is less than 7 years, it has to be suspended if the accused has remained on bail during the trial,” observed Justice Thipsay. “Special reasons are required to change the status prevailing during the trial. There must be something extraordinary.”
Salman wasn’t in the court during proceedings. His sister Alvira reached the HC at 10.30 am. The judge heard the case at 11.10 am, for close to two hours.
Senior advocate Amit Desai, who led the defence, sought relief on four points: that the accident was caused due to a tyre which burst; that the evidence provided by Ravindra Patil, the constable assigned to Salman’s security, should have been rejected; that a fourth person, Ashok Singh, was present in the car and was behind the wheel; and that there existed no grounds to treat the case as one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
He also argued that out of the people present in the car, only Patil was brought before the court and that one of the passengers, singer Kamaal Khan, was not examined as a witness. He added that the findings of the bloodalcohol report had to be ignored as investigators failed to follow proper procedure in preparing it.
Desai argued that there existed sufficient evidence provided by the prosecution’s own witnesses to show that the accident was caused by the tyre that exploded. Calling him a “reluctant witness”, Desai submitted that Ravindra Patil’s evidence contained enough embellishments to be deemed inadmissible. He rejected the conclusion that the introduction of Ashok Singh in the concluding phase of the trial offended the rule of law.
As for his final contention, Desai argued that three distinct ingredients constitute a culpable homicide: recklessness, actual knowledge that the reckless act is likely to result in death, and actual death.
The court observed that it may have to examine if the offence committed by the actor does indeed add up to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, or correspond to a case of causing death by rash and negligent act.
Chief Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde opposed the suspension of sentence on these counts, maintaining that there was no fourth person in the vehicle. Countering the statement about not examining Kamaal Khan, he said the singer was unavailable to testify before the court as he was a UK national.
Shinde submitted that there existed sufficient evidence to prove all vital aspects – Salman was driving the vehicle; he was drunk; the tyre of the vehicle burst because of the impact of the accident; and that the accident was not caused by the ruptured tyre.
The court, however, discarded the submission saying justice cannot be administered on that basis.
Late in the evening Salman appeared in the sessions court, executed a fresh bond and left within few minutes.
His appeal will now be listed for hearing on June 15, after the HC reopens following summer vacations.
THE 15 LAWYERS WHO’VE DEFENDED SALMAN
Salman’s defence is led by senior advocate Amit Desai, who has appeared before the court in the builder Sunil Lahoriya’s murder case and as the Special Public Prosecutor in the Malegaon Blast case of 2008. The actor was also represented by former Attorney General of India, Harish Salve, in the High Court on Wednesday, when he was granted interim bail.
The two senior advocates are assisted by Shrikant Shivade and Anand Desai. Shivade represented Salman in the sessions court and has appeared for director Madhur Bhandarkar and actor Shiney Ahuja when rape allegations were levelled against them and Desai is the Managing Partner of the law firm DSK Legal. They are followed by junior lawyers Manhar Singh Saini and Chandrima Mitra.
Apart from them, advocate Niranjan Mundargi holds the “second brief” in the case in HC.
Senior advocate Ashok Mundargi and his son Hrishikesh Mundargi had appeared for Salman when he approached the sessions court against a Bandra court’s order directing him to face trial for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Ashok is a reputed HC lawyer.
Salman was represented by advocate Dipesh Mehta, his father Sampat Mehta and advocate Shyamkumar Marwadi in the earlier trial in the Bandra court. Well-known criminal lawyer Harshad Ponda and son Aabad have appeared for the actor at Bandra Court, HC as well as the Supreme Court in the very early stages of the case. It was Harshad who had Salman discharged from the culpable homicide charge when it was applied for the first time. The first lawyer to represent Salman in this case was Waris Pathan, who is now a Member of the Legislative Assembly from Mumbai form AIMIM.
Justice Thipsay tells the actor to seek permission before travelling abroad, pay monthly visit to Bandra police station.
Actor Salman Khan could remain free for a considerable length of time even if the Bombay High Court only rules partially in his favour.
Justice Abhay Thipsay, while hearing the appeal filed by the actor against the conviction and sentence handed to him for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, granted major reprieve to the actor on Friday. The court admitted his appeal, suspended the sentence and let him out on regular bail for Rs 30,000.
The only impediment Salman faces is that he will have to seek the HC’s permission before travelling abroad and appear before the Bandra police once a month.
“Normally, if the sentence is less than 7 years, it has to be suspended if the accused has remained on bail during the trial,” observed Justice Thipsay. “Special reasons are required to change the status prevailing during the trial. There must be something extraordinary.”
Salman wasn’t in the court during proceedings. His sister Alvira reached the HC at 10.30 am. The judge heard the case at 11.10 am, for close to two hours.
Senior advocate Amit Desai, who led the defence, sought relief on four points: that the accident was caused due to a tyre which burst; that the evidence provided by Ravindra Patil, the constable assigned to Salman’s security, should have been rejected; that a fourth person, Ashok Singh, was present in the car and was behind the wheel; and that there existed no grounds to treat the case as one of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
He also argued that out of the people present in the car, only Patil was brought before the court and that one of the passengers, singer Kamaal Khan, was not examined as a witness. He added that the findings of the bloodalcohol report had to be ignored as investigators failed to follow proper procedure in preparing it.
Desai argued that there existed sufficient evidence provided by the prosecution’s own witnesses to show that the accident was caused by the tyre that exploded. Calling him a “reluctant witness”, Desai submitted that Ravindra Patil’s evidence contained enough embellishments to be deemed inadmissible. He rejected the conclusion that the introduction of Ashok Singh in the concluding phase of the trial offended the rule of law.
As for his final contention, Desai argued that three distinct ingredients constitute a culpable homicide: recklessness, actual knowledge that the reckless act is likely to result in death, and actual death.
The court observed that it may have to examine if the offence committed by the actor does indeed add up to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, or correspond to a case of causing death by rash and negligent act.
Chief Public Prosecutor Sandeep Shinde opposed the suspension of sentence on these counts, maintaining that there was no fourth person in the vehicle. Countering the statement about not examining Kamaal Khan, he said the singer was unavailable to testify before the court as he was a UK national.
Shinde submitted that there existed sufficient evidence to prove all vital aspects – Salman was driving the vehicle; he was drunk; the tyre of the vehicle burst because of the impact of the accident; and that the accident was not caused by the ruptured tyre.
The court, however, discarded the submission saying justice cannot be administered on that basis.
Late in the evening Salman appeared in the sessions court, executed a fresh bond and left within few minutes.
His appeal will now be listed for hearing on June 15, after the HC reopens following summer vacations.
THE 15 LAWYERS WHO’VE DEFENDED SALMAN
Salman’s defence is led by senior advocate Amit Desai, who has appeared before the court in the builder Sunil Lahoriya’s murder case and as the Special Public Prosecutor in the Malegaon Blast case of 2008. The actor was also represented by former Attorney General of India, Harish Salve, in the High Court on Wednesday, when he was granted interim bail.
The two senior advocates are assisted by Shrikant Shivade and Anand Desai. Shivade represented Salman in the sessions court and has appeared for director Madhur Bhandarkar and actor Shiney Ahuja when rape allegations were levelled against them and Desai is the Managing Partner of the law firm DSK Legal. They are followed by junior lawyers Manhar Singh Saini and Chandrima Mitra.
Apart from them, advocate Niranjan Mundargi holds the “second brief” in the case in HC.
Senior advocate Ashok Mundargi and his son Hrishikesh Mundargi had appeared for Salman when he approached the sessions court against a Bandra court’s order directing him to face trial for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. Ashok is a reputed HC lawyer.
Salman was represented by advocate Dipesh Mehta, his father Sampat Mehta and advocate Shyamkumar Marwadi in the earlier trial in the Bandra court. Well-known criminal lawyer Harshad Ponda and son Aabad have appeared for the actor at Bandra Court, HC as well as the Supreme Court in the very early stages of the case. It was Harshad who had Salman discharged from the culpable homicide charge when it was applied for the first time. The first lawyer to represent Salman in this case was Waris Pathan, who is now a Member of the Legislative Assembly from Mumbai form AIMIM.
