The Maharashtra government Friday challenged in the Supreme Court the acquittal of actor Salman Khan in the 2002 hit-and-run case, which left one person dead.
“…The (Bombay) High Court has not concluded as to who was driving the vehicle at the time of the accident,” stated the state government’s appeal, adding that the evidence of all injured witnesses was important and had “more probative value being victims of the incident.”
- Supreme Court refuses to fast-track Salman Khan hit-and-run case
- 2002 hit-and-run: Victim’s family files appeal in SC against Salman acquittal
- Salman hit-and-run case: ‘Still making up mind on whether to reopen case’
- Salman Khan files caveat petition in Supreme Court in hit-and-run case
- Salman Khan hit-and-run case: Maharashtra govt to appeal against actor's acquittal
- 2002 Hit-and-Run-case: Who said what
Filed through Maharashtra’s chief standing counsel Nishant R Katneshwarkar, the petition also refuted the HC finding that the probe was conducted to weaken the prosecution’s case.
Instead, “the HC has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective,” said the state police. They claimed a “hypothesis” was recorded while acquitting Salman of charges of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, grievous hurt, drunken driving etc.
Asking the apex court to set aside the acquittal order, it disputed the High Court’s observation that the investigation was conducted in a careless and faulty manner, claiming that there were many witnesses who corroborated the charges against Salman adequately.
- Home Minister Rajnath Singh Assures Safety Of All Tourists Stranded On Havelock Island
- Government To Waive Service Tax On Debit, Credit Card Transactions Of Up To Rs 2,000
- President Pranab Mukherjee Criticises Parliament Disruptions Over Demonetisation
- Pakistan International Airlines Flight Carrying Over 40 Passenger On Board Crashes
- Shah Rukh Khan On Raees Clash With Kaabil: It’s Impossible To Have A Solo Release In India
- US-President Elect Donald Trump Named TIME’s Person Of The Year 2016
- O. Panneerselvam: 10 Things You Need To Know
- PM Narendra Modi Slams Opposition For Not Letting Parliament Function
- Nawazuddin Siddiqui On Working In Raees: Was Nervous To Shoot With Shah Rukh Khan
- Bathinda Dancer Murder: Video Showing Accused Opening Fire At Marriage
- 5 Lesser Known Facts About Sasikala Natarajan
- Congress Leader Shashi Tharoor’s Delhi Home Burgled: Here’s What Happened
- Reserve Bank Of India Keeps Repo Rate Unchanged Post Demonetisation
- Bigg Boss 10 Dec 06 Review: Swami Om Pees In Kitchen
- Lenovo k6 Power Video Review
The appeal said evidence of complainant Ravindra Patil, who was with Salman in the Toyota Land Cruiser, was legally tenable and its rejection was wrong. Patil was the actor’s bodyguard who had said Salman was driving drunk and had ignored his warnings. Patil died of tuberculosis in 2007 and when the High Court examined his testimonies, it held the evidence was not admissible under law.
Further, the petition said the prosecution could not have been indicted for non-examination of Kamaal Khan in the trial court, who was also in the SUV on September 28, 2002. It said the HC had also ignored the “conduct” of Salman as he did not make any attempt to report the incident to police or help the victims.