The judgment of the Salman Khan hit-and-run case has been published on the Bombay High Court website, a judgment that has acquitted the actor of all charges..In the 305-pg judgment, the court held that it could not find substantial evidence to determine whether Khan was the driver of the car that killed one person and injured four others..Earlier, the Session Court had framed charges under Sections 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 279 (rash driving), 337 (causing hurt), 338 (causing grievous hurt), 427 (mischief), and 304A (criminal negligence) of the Indian Penal Code against Khan..In addition to these, he was also booked under Sections 134(A) and (B) r/w 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 134 requires the owner of the car (irrespective of whether or not he was the driver) to aid persons injured as a result of an accident. While going into why the actor failed to do so, the court noted that the appellant was encountered with an angry mob armed with rods. Under the provision, this is a valid defence, as it was a situation “beyond the control of the appellant”..However, the court did not fail to lament the shoddy manner in which the evidence was presented before the court, AR Joshi J. noted,.“In this case, considering the various weaknesses in the case of the prosecution, various shortcomings such as non-examination of necessary and appropriate witnesses, the omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the injured witnesses which go to the root of the matter, definitely a doubt has arisen as to the involvement of the appellant for the offences with which he is charged.”.The judge also foresaw the outrage the acquittal of the actor would provoke..“While arriving at the above findings this Court is not oblivious of the perception or the opinion of members of general public. However, it is well settled principle that a Court must decide the case on the material brought on record and which can be accepted as an evidence as per the procedure laid down by law. The court shall not be swayed away by any popular belief that a particular person considering his avocation, profession or standing, must have committed such an offence and must be held guilty..…it is for good reasons that the law of Evidence has no place for the general public opinion as a factor that should weigh with the Court while deciding a case at hand.”.The actor was represented by a battery of lawyers led by Senior Advocate Amit Desai, along with DSK Legal Partners Anand Desai and Nirav Shah, among others..Read the judgment below:
The judgment of the Salman Khan hit-and-run case has been published on the Bombay High Court website, a judgment that has acquitted the actor of all charges..In the 305-pg judgment, the court held that it could not find substantial evidence to determine whether Khan was the driver of the car that killed one person and injured four others..Earlier, the Session Court had framed charges under Sections 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 279 (rash driving), 337 (causing hurt), 338 (causing grievous hurt), 427 (mischief), and 304A (criminal negligence) of the Indian Penal Code against Khan..In addition to these, he was also booked under Sections 134(A) and (B) r/w 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 134 requires the owner of the car (irrespective of whether or not he was the driver) to aid persons injured as a result of an accident. While going into why the actor failed to do so, the court noted that the appellant was encountered with an angry mob armed with rods. Under the provision, this is a valid defence, as it was a situation “beyond the control of the appellant”..However, the court did not fail to lament the shoddy manner in which the evidence was presented before the court, AR Joshi J. noted,.“In this case, considering the various weaknesses in the case of the prosecution, various shortcomings such as non-examination of necessary and appropriate witnesses, the omissions and contradictions in the evidence of the injured witnesses which go to the root of the matter, definitely a doubt has arisen as to the involvement of the appellant for the offences with which he is charged.”.The judge also foresaw the outrage the acquittal of the actor would provoke..“While arriving at the above findings this Court is not oblivious of the perception or the opinion of members of general public. However, it is well settled principle that a Court must decide the case on the material brought on record and which can be accepted as an evidence as per the procedure laid down by law. The court shall not be swayed away by any popular belief that a particular person considering his avocation, profession or standing, must have committed such an offence and must be held guilty..…it is for good reasons that the law of Evidence has no place for the general public opinion as a factor that should weigh with the Court while deciding a case at hand.”.The actor was represented by a battery of lawyers led by Senior Advocate Amit Desai, along with DSK Legal Partners Anand Desai and Nirav Shah, among others..Read the judgment below:
