Follow Us:
Wednesday, July 18, 2018

2002 Hit-and-Run-case: Who said what

Who said what after Salman Khan was acquitted in 2002 hit and run case by the Bombay HC.

| Mumbai | Updated: December 11, 2015 1:47:02 am
Salman Khan after the hit-and-run case in 2002 and the actor after his acquittal Wednesday. (Source: Express) Salman Khan after the hit-and-run case in 2002 and the actor after his acquittal Wednesday. (Source: Express)

“What standard of proof was to be provided to prove that Salman was driving the car. This just proves that people with all the money and the lawyers can just get off. It is very unfortunate. There has been a loss of human life. I really hope Salman feels sorry for what he has done.”

Julio Ribeiro
Former Commissioner of Mumbai Police

“Ii is crystal clear that a crime took place in 2002 and when the investigating agency fails to find the guilty, the conscience of the common man suffers from a shocking impact. The court has powers to see if there is any more evidence to be brought. If it feels there is then it can direct the investigating agency to place it. In the present case, crime was committed, indeed, also meaning that there is a need to find the guilty. Someone was driving the car and then the accident took place. So, somebody must have been there driving. Ultimately, it is about the rights of the common man.”

P D Kode
Former Justice, Bombay High Court

“It’s a classic case of failure of criminal justice as a whole. Initial stages of investigation there are certain loose ends which were not stitched properly. A case was presented in the court and there were lot of flip-flops. The prosecution should have been in a position to explain who drove the car. A detail that has been left unanswered.”

K Subramanyam
Former DGP, Maharashtra

“It would have been better if the case was to have gone back for retrial to the sessions court because there were only rectifiable errors. Kamaal Khan testimony could have been taken. 37 out of the 64 witnesses were dropped. At least some specific order could be given on Ashok Singh (Salman’s driver). Either he could be guilty of giving false evidence or of negligent driving, which resulted in death.”

Y P Singh
Former IPS officer

“I had appeared for Salman against the addition of the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder in 2003 and had succeeded then. Now with Salman’s acquittal, the charge also stands vindicated.”

Shirish Gupte
Senior criminal lawyer

“THE judgment is a mockery of the criminal justice system. While dictating the order, the justice had pointed to procedural discrepancy. Several Supreme court judgments have stated that procedure is the handmaid of justice and one cannot use procedural loopholes for the denial of justice. You cannot punch holes in procedures to obliterate justice. Even when the lower court found Salman guilty, I had filed an application asking for Kamaal Khan to be called in for questioning, as we knew this issue would be brought up at a later stage.”

Abha Singh

The high court should have considered the statement of constable Ravindra Patil recorded by the sessions court. The Indian Evidence Act validates such a statement recorded by a witness before a magistrate. The prosecution probably thought that he may have helped Salman Khan, who was his friend. But that precisely would have helped the prosecution to declare him hostile and it would have then not have provided the advantage to Salman Khan.

Ujjwal Nikam
Special Public Prosecutor

(Compiled by BENITA CHACKO)

For all the latest Mumbai News, download Indian Express App