It is an exaggeration to say that Salman Khan was driving his vehicle at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph, said the actor's counsel Amit Desai on October 26, 2015.
Desai is arguing the actor's appeal against conviction and five-year sentence for culpable homicide not amounting to murder for the death of a person in a 2002 case where his Land Cruiser rammed into a Bandra laundry on Hill Road. Desai said the prosecution's charge smacks of non-application of mind.
"That he was driving at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph is an exaggeration by Ravindra Patil, who said what the police told him," Desai told justice A R Joshi of the Bombay high court before whom the appeal is being argued.
According to the prosecution case, Khan, then 33, left his Galaxy Apartments residence at Bandra on September 27, 2002, went to Rain Bar, in Juhu the drove to JW Marriott Hotel and then was on his way home when his vehicle rammed into the Hill Road shop front at around 2.45 am on September 28, 2002 near the 90-degree turn of Hill Road-St Andrews Road.
Desai who is analysing Patil's statements said that he had never in his FIR mentioned anything about alcohol. He said Patil, who died in 2007 when the trial was pending before a magistrate, made "contradictory statements'' about rashness.
According to Patil, the vehicle was at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph, and also that the started from Marriott at 2.15 am and the accident took place at 2.45 am.
"The distance between JW Marriot and the accident spot is around eight to 10 kms...in that speed it would have crossed that place in eight to 10 minutes," Desai said. Patil was silent on what route the actor had taken said Desai."Whether they had encountered one turn, two turns, on left side, on right side, what route is followed....he has not been able to tell the route," Desai said.
Desai said Patil's statement was given so that section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, could be added.
"The narrative of the prosecution case, does not create a confidence in the mind of the court," he said. "Only one thing that Patil has said correctly is that four persons were injured in the accident," he said.
Desai again reiterated that though the actor's friend Kamal Khan was in the vehicle and could have been a witness to explain which route was taken, he was not examined by the prosecutor at all as witness.
"That he was driving at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph is an exaggeration by Ravindra Patil, who said what the police told him," Desai told justice A R Joshi of the Bombay high court before whom the appeal is being argued.
According to the prosecution case, Khan, then 33, left his Galaxy Apartments residence at Bandra on September 27, 2002, went to Rain Bar, in Juhu the drove to JW Marriott Hotel and then was on his way home when his vehicle rammed into the Hill Road shop front at around 2.45 am on September 28, 2002 near the 90-degree turn of Hill Road-St Andrews Road.
Desai who is analysing Patil's statements said that he had never in his FIR mentioned anything about alcohol. He said Patil, who died in 2007 when the trial was pending before a magistrate, made "contradictory statements'' about rashness.
According to Patil, the vehicle was at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph, and also that the started from Marriott at 2.15 am and the accident took place at 2.45 am.
"The distance between JW Marriot and the accident spot is around eight to 10 kms...in that speed it would have crossed that place in eight to 10 minutes," Desai said. Patil was silent on what route the actor had taken said Desai."Whether they had encountered one turn, two turns, on left side, on right side, what route is followed....he has not been able to tell the route," Desai said.
Desai said Patil's statement was given so that section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, could be added.
"The narrative of the prosecution case, does not create a confidence in the mind of the court," he said. "Only one thing that Patil has said correctly is that four persons were injured in the accident," he said.
Desai again reiterated that though the actor's friend Kamal Khan was in the vehicle and could have been a witness to explain which route was taken, he was not examined by the prosecutor at all as witness.
0 comments:
Post a Comment