A day after the Bombay High Court overturned the trial court’s order and acquitted Bollywood actor Salman Khan of all the charges in the 2002 hit-and-run case, the Maharashtra Government said on Friday that it would decide by Monday, on whether to challenge the HC verdict in the Supreme Court.
Talking to mediapersons at Nagpur, Maharashtra’s Minister of State for Home Ram Shinde said: “We have not yet taken a call on whether to appeal against the High Court’s order in the Supreme Court. If the law and Judiciary Department feels after reading the judgment that there are lapses, we will move the Apex Court.”
Replying to a question, Shinde indicated the State Government would to move the Apex Court against the High Court by Monday.
The actor’s acquittal had come as major setback for both the Mumbai Police and Prosecution that handled the case.
While acquitting the actor of all charges in the 13-year-old hit-and-run, Justice AR Joshi of the High Court had said on Thursday that the Prosecution had “failed to establish its case on all the charges”.
In his observations, the Judge had said: “Bearing in mind the circumstances, the considered view of the court is that the Prosecution has failed to establish its case on all the charges...on the basis of this type of evidence, the appellant-accused (Salman Khan) cannot be convicted.... The appeal is allowed. The order of the Mumbai Sessions Court convicting him is quashed, set aside... the appellant-accused is acquitted of all charges”.
In a stinging criticism of the manner in which the actor was tried in the Sessions Court, the Judge had said the appreciation of evidence done by the Trial Court was not “proper and legal” as per the set principles of criminal jurisprudence like accepting the hotels bill without panchanama, which all together is riddled with fabrication.
Giving the “benefit of doubt” to the actor, Justice Joshi had observed: “In our case the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. In that case, the benefit of doubt goes in favour of the accused...on the basis of this type of evidence, appellant-accused cannot be convicted”.
Among the charges that failed the scrutiny of the high court was that the actor was driving the vehicle (that met with an incident) under the influence of alcohol.
In his ruling, the Judge observed:” This court has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to bring material on record to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant-accused (Salman) was driving and driving under influence of alcohol, also, whether the accident occurred due to bursting (of tyre) prior to the incident or tyre burst after the incident”.
The Prosecution’s case was that an inebriated Salman had on intervening the night of September 27-28, 2002, rammed his Toyota land Cruiser lexus into the American Express Bakery and laundry at Bandra (west) killing one Nurullah Mehboob Sharif and injuring four others.
The High Court’s ruling is a total reversal of the view taken by the Trial Court which had on May 6 this year convicted Salman for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sentenced him five years’ imprisonment.