A city sessions court on Monday granted two weeks’ time to Salman Khan’s lawyer to submit certain documents to substantiate the grounds challenging the Magistrate court’s order invoking the charge of “culpable homicide not amount to murder” against the actor in the 2002 hit-and-run case, even as Salman failed to make a personal appearance in the court.
Expectations to the contrary in the media, Salman — who had returned to the city from the United States in the early hours on Sunday — did not show up in the sessions court when it heard his appeal challenging the Bandra Magistrate court’s enhancing the charge against him from “causing death due to negligence” to “culpable homicide not amounting to murder”.
After hearing Salman’s senior counsel Ashok Mundargi who sought time to file certain documents, sessions court Judge UB Hejib accepted the defence lawyer’s prayer and adjourned the hearing for two weeks.
The sessions judge said he would decide Salman’s revision application on April 8 before taking a call on holding a trial into the much-discussed case.
On September 28, 2002, Salman — allegedly in a drunken state — drove his land Cruiser near his Bandra residence killing a pavement dweller and injuring four others, who were asleep.
Salman was initially charged under section 304 (II) of IPC for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
However, nearly nine and half years after the Bombay High Court dropped the charge filed against the actor under section 304 (II) of IPC which attracts a maximum punishment of 10 years’ imprisonment, the Bandra court on January 31, 2013 allowed the prosecution to revive the charge of “culpable homicide not amounting to murder” for allegedly killing a pavement dweller and injuring four others in the hit-and-run case.
Incidentally, the Magistrate’s court passed the order enhancing charge against the actor and committing the case trial to a sessions court, while it was trying Salman for a lesser charge of causing death by negligence (Section 304 A IPC), which provides for a maximum punishment of two years in jail.
On March 6, 2013, Salman filed a revision application challenging the Bandra Magistrate court’s order enhancing the charge against him from “causing death due to negligence” to “culpable homicide not amounting to murder”. In his application, the actor said that Magistrate Vasant Patil’s order was “erroneous, bad in law and contrary to evidence on record”.
In an 80-odd page revision application filed before a session court — to which the Bandra Magistrate committed the 2002 case for a trial, Salman stated that Magistrate Vasant Patil had “failed to appreciate” that he had neither intention (to kill anyone) nor knowledge of the fact that the alleged act of driving rashly and negligently would lead to the death of a person.
In the event of it admitting the actor’s revision application, the sessions court will decide on whether a more stringent charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder could be invoked.
If the sessions court rejects the actor’s plea, the actor would either have to face trial under the same charge in the sessions court or move the Bombay High Court in appeal.
In the event of Salman moving the high court at later stage, the clock would have turned a full circle.
For, the Bombay High Court on September 3, 2003 dropped the charge under Section 304 (II) of IPC and ordered that he be tried in a city magistrate’s court for causing death by negligence under 304 (I) of IPC and for other offences including rash driving, causing hurt, causing grievous injury by an act endangering life or personal safety of others) and driving in a drunken state. These current charges attracted a maximum sentence of two years’ jail term.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court on December 19,2003 disposed of the Maharashtra Government’s Special leave Petition challenging the Bombay High Court’s order quashing a sessions court’s order framing a charge against the actor under Section 304 (II) of IPC for culpable homicide.
While asking the trial court to proceed with the trial against Salman without the charge of “culpable homicide”, the Supreme Court had taken a stand that both the orders (that of the Bombay High Court and the one passed by the sessions court) were untenable in law, as such a view “in certainty about a particular charge” could be taken only at the stage of trial.
On his part, the Bandra Magistrate went by the Supreme Court’s ruling — that gives him the discretion of deciding on entertaining the prosecution’s plea or not at the stage of trial.