Salman Khan 'hit-and-run case': Here's why Bhai was found 'not guilty'

On Thursday, the Bombay High Court acquitted Salman Khan of all charges of the 2002-hit-and-run case in which he had been earlier convicted and sentenced to five years imprisonment by a sessions court. On September 28, 2002, his car had rammed into a bakery shop in suburban Bandra where one person was killed and four others were injured. 

What the trial court said in May 2015

On May 6, Salman was convicted of culpable homicide and sentenced to five years imprisonment in the 2002 hit-and-run case but was granted interim bail till May 8. He had been found guilty of offences under section 279 IPC (rash and negligent driving), and sections 337 and 338 IPC (causing hurt by acts endangering life or personal property of others). He was also sentenced to jail for six months under sections 181 (driving without licence) and 185 of Motor Vehicles Act (drink driving).

Judge Deshpande had also rejected the prosecution's plea that the actor was not drunk while driving and also that he didn't have a driving licence. “All charges have been proved against you...What you have to say?" the judge asked Salman who was in the dock. "I hold that you were driving the vehicle. You were intoxicated. I also do not agree with your plea that the person who had died had received fatal injuries after a crane dropped the car on the persons underneath while removing it," the judge said, rejecting the defence's claim that the actor's driver Ashok Singh was at the wheel when the accident took place.

What Bombay High Court said in December 2015

While acquitting the 49-year-old actor in a jampacked courtroom, Justice AR Joshi said, "The appeal is allowed. The trial court's verdict is quashed and set aside. Salman is acquitted of all charges." 

On hearing the verdict, Salman broke down. The actor, who wore a blue-white check shirt, arrived in the court at 1.30 p,m even as the police made a tight bandobast around the high court premises. He was accompanied by his bodyguard Shera, brother-in-law Ayush, sister Alvira and his manager.

Justice Joshi, who started dictating the verdict on Monday, said the prosecution failed to establish its case against the appellant accused (Salman) on all charges.

Lawyers, litigants and many others had gathered in and around the court to have a glimpse of Salman as he came rushing from a studio in Karjat on the outskirts of Mumbai where he was shooting.

The judge said the burden is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and this needs to be done beyond reasonable doubt. There are various shortcomings by the prosecution like not recording evidence of necessary and important witnesses and omissions and contradictions in the evidence of injured witnesses, which definitely create a doubt about the involvement of Salman for offences for which he has been charged, the court said. On the basis of such evidence, Salman cannot be convicted, it said.

The judge further said that the investigation was conducted in a faulty manner with many loose ends and as such benefit of this had to be given in favour of the accused. It is the duty of the court to analyse the evidence submitted to it and to see that the offence is proved beyond reasonable doubt, Justice Joshi said.

He said he is of the considered view that the appreciation of evidence done by the trial court while convicting the appellant was not proper and legal, as per the principles of criminal jurisprudence. Consequently it must be said that this is not a case where the prosecution has successfully established its charges, he observed, adding that the entire evidence of the prosecution was circumstantial in nature.

On the main aspects as to driving and drunkenness, the prosecution has not brought any material evidence which spells out the offence of the accused, the court said. The trial court erred in accepting bills (of Rain Bar and Restaurant where Salman had gone before the mishap) without a panchnama, the judge said while dictating the verdict. 

In summary: 

1. The appeal is allowed. The trial court's verdict is quashed and set aside. Salman is acquitted of all charges.

2. The prosecution failed to establish its case against the appellant-accused (Salman) on all charges. The burden is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused and this needs to be done beyond reasonable doubt.

3. There are various shortcomings by the prosecution like not recording evidence of necessary and important witnesses and omissions.

4. There are contradictions in the evidence of injured witnesses, which definitely create a doubt about the involvement of Salman for offences for which he has been charged. On the basis of such evidence, Salman cannot be convicted.

5. The investigation was conducted in a faulty manner with many loose ends and as such, benefit of this had to be given in favour of the accused.

6. The trial court erred in accepting bills (of Rain Bar and Restaurant where Salman had gone before the mishap) without a panchnama, 

7. The judge said he is of the considered view that the appreciation of evidence done by the trial court while convicting the appellant was not proper and legal, as per the principles of criminal jurisprudence.

Salman Khan case time-line: 

September 2002: Salman Khan's car runs over five people sleeping on a Mumbai street killing a homeless man and injuring four others. 

October 2002: Khan charged with culpable homicide not amounting to murder was arrested but granted bail. 

May 2003: Court rejects Salman Khan's plea to drop culpable homicide charge.

June 2003: Bombay High Court drops culpable homicide charge and instead, he is tried for rash and negligent driving. 

October 2007: Ravindra Patil, the prime witness dies .

March 2015: Salman Khan tells the court that he was drunk and his driver was behind the wheel. 

May 2015: Salman Khan is found guilty and given a five-year sentence by a trial court. 

December 2015: Salman Khan is acquitted of all charges.