MUMBAI: Ashok Singh took the witness stand on March 30, 2015, almost 13 years since the fateful night when his employer's car had rammed into a Bandra bakery, killing one person and injuring four others. As the judgment copy is awaited, legal minds say the driver's sudden presence at the trial was the twist that swerved the case towards conviction.
Singh, Salman Khan's driver, told the court that he was driving the Land Cruiser when it crashed into the bakery's shutters on the night of September 27-28, 2002. His deposition was contrary to what deceased witness and Khan's former police bodyguard Ravindra Patil, who was present in the vehicle at the time of the incident, had said. Patil had given two statements to the police and stood by his second statement that he had warned the actor, who was allegedly drunk, to slow down, but to no avail. Patil died in 2007 after deposing before the magistrate in Bandra, where the actor was earlier facing the less serious charge of causing death due to rash driving, which attracts up to two years in jail.
READ ALSO: Complete coverage — Salman Khan hit-and-run case
As it happened: Salman hit-and-run case verdict
A senior lawyer from the prosecution said the introduction of the driver at a belated stage may have been an adverse turning point for the actor. "Which logical or prudent mind would believe the driver's claims?" special public prosecutor Pradip Gharat had asked in court while making his closing submissions in the trial as he called Singh a "self-condemned liar deposing falsely on oath.'' Singh said Salman's father Salim Khan asked him to finally depose, although he had wanted to do so even earlier. Gharat had asked, "Can it be accepted that Salman's father waited with a calm mind and tolerated the sufferings his son was put through by the driver all these years, till the turn of the defence witness came in the trial, even as the driver continued to serve with the family?''
Salman case: What is culpable homicide?
How Salman Khan was convicted
The case boiled down to who was at the wheel, the prosecutor had said. Gharat called the driver 'unbelievable' as a witness and said thus the prosecution's claim that Salman was at the wheel should be believed, given the lack of any other plausible alternatives. Lawyers outside the court on Wednesday also said the driver's statement ought to have been made much earlier, in 2002, both when Salman was arrested and later when he was tried for rash driving in the Bandra magistrate's court.
Senior counsel Nitin Pradhan said to prove his case, perhaps Salman could have first sought to depose as a witness, placed himself for cross examination, which he didn't, before bringing the driver as a defence witness.
The judge held that the prosecution proved its case against the actor, but did not bother with Gharat's submission to initiate perjury proceedings against Singh in the case.
Singh, Salman Khan's driver, told the court that he was driving the Land Cruiser when it crashed into the bakery's shutters on the night of September 27-28, 2002. His deposition was contrary to what deceased witness and Khan's former police bodyguard Ravindra Patil, who was present in the vehicle at the time of the incident, had said. Patil had given two statements to the police and stood by his second statement that he had warned the actor, who was allegedly drunk, to slow down, but to no avail. Patil died in 2007 after deposing before the magistrate in Bandra, where the actor was earlier facing the less serious charge of causing death due to rash driving, which attracts up to two years in jail.
READ ALSO: Complete coverage — Salman Khan hit-and-run case
As it happened: Salman hit-and-run case verdict
A senior lawyer from the prosecution said the introduction of the driver at a belated stage may have been an adverse turning point for the actor. "Which logical or prudent mind would believe the driver's claims?" special public prosecutor Pradip Gharat had asked in court while making his closing submissions in the trial as he called Singh a "self-condemned liar deposing falsely on oath.'' Singh said Salman's father Salim Khan asked him to finally depose, although he had wanted to do so even earlier. Gharat had asked, "Can it be accepted that Salman's father waited with a calm mind and tolerated the sufferings his son was put through by the driver all these years, till the turn of the defence witness came in the trial, even as the driver continued to serve with the family?''
Salman case: What is culpable homicide?
How Salman Khan was convicted
The case boiled down to who was at the wheel, the prosecutor had said. Gharat called the driver 'unbelievable' as a witness and said thus the prosecution's claim that Salman was at the wheel should be believed, given the lack of any other plausible alternatives. Lawyers outside the court on Wednesday also said the driver's statement ought to have been made much earlier, in 2002, both when Salman was arrested and later when he was tried for rash driving in the Bandra magistrate's court.
Senior counsel Nitin Pradhan said to prove his case, perhaps Salman could have first sought to depose as a witness, placed himself for cross examination, which he didn't, before bringing the driver as a defence witness.
The judge held that the prosecution proved its case against the actor, but did not bother with Gharat's submission to initiate perjury proceedings against Singh in the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment