Salman Khan has appealed against his conviction in the hit-and-run case
Mumbai:
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday pointed out several lacunae in the procedures for checking presence of alcohol in the blood samples of actor Salman Khan in the September 2002 hit-and-run case involving him. It also stated that there was a 'lack of concrete material' on the issue that he had consumed liquor in a bar before the hit-and-run accident on September 28, 2002. (Also Read: Salman Khan Hit-And-Run: Prosecution Asks Court Not to Show Leniency)
Justice AR Joshi, dictating his judgement in open court in the appeal filed by the actor against his conviction and five-year sentence by the sessions court, mentioned a series of lacunae starting with the extraction of the actor's blood samples to the transfer, preservation and testing for alcohol content in them.
"One prosecution witness (PW-20) - medical officer Shashikant J Pawar of Sir JJ Hospital - carried out the clinical examination of the appellant-accused and found him smelling of alcohol. He subsequently drew a blood sample and put three ml in two vials, but ultimately what reached the analyst was four ml blood in one vial.
PW-20 gave one sealed envelope containing two forms - Form A and Form B - and two vials, to the police station. Sharad Bapu Borade (PW-21), a police constable, took the two envelopes to the receiving clerk Dattatraya K Bhalshankar (PW-18), at Forensics Sciences Lab, who has not been examined by the court. PW-18 says one police constable gave him the blood samples - this is a missing link in the biological evidence," said Justice Joshi.
He added that the samples should have been placed under 'proper custody' to prevent 'internal fermentation' to render the final results being useless.
Justice Joshi also said that evidence given by parking attendant Kalpesh Verma (PW-12) of JW Marriott Hotel in Juhu, did not imply that Salman Khan had driven the car.
He said, "Kalpesh Verma handed over the car to the actor when he came out of the hotel, but the witness was silent on the condition of the appellant-accused at that time. he parking attendant also saw Salman sitting in the driver's seat with the AC on and later closed the door after receiving tips (Rs 500), proceeded to keep it in a common box and on return saw the car going away."
The judge also analysed the evidence of a waiter, Malay Bag (PW-5), and a manager, Rizwan Ali Rakhangi (PW-9), at the Rain Bar, the place where the actor allegedly consumed alcohol before the accident.
He observed, "The trial court had not analysed whether these bills can be accepted to prove the drunkenness of the appellant-accused. During his examination by chief public prosecutor Sandeep Shinde, Malay Bag had pointed out that Salman had a 'white coloured glass' in his hand. However, during cross-examination by defence counsel Amit Desai he (Bag) had said it was a 'clear liquid'."
Malay Bag said that he is a regular visitor to the bar, but the defence counsel has said everyone who visits the bar does not necessarily consume alcohol," Justice Joshi observed. He also added that there was 'no concrete evidence' before the court from the two witnesses that (Salman Khan) had consumed alcohol there.
Justice AR Joshi, dictating his judgement in open court in the appeal filed by the actor against his conviction and five-year sentence by the sessions court, mentioned a series of lacunae starting with the extraction of the actor's blood samples to the transfer, preservation and testing for alcohol content in them.
"One prosecution witness (PW-20) - medical officer Shashikant J Pawar of Sir JJ Hospital - carried out the clinical examination of the appellant-accused and found him smelling of alcohol. He subsequently drew a blood sample and put three ml in two vials, but ultimately what reached the analyst was four ml blood in one vial.
PW-20 gave one sealed envelope containing two forms - Form A and Form B - and two vials, to the police station. Sharad Bapu Borade (PW-21), a police constable, took the two envelopes to the receiving clerk Dattatraya K Bhalshankar (PW-18), at Forensics Sciences Lab, who has not been examined by the court. PW-18 says one police constable gave him the blood samples - this is a missing link in the biological evidence," said Justice Joshi.
He added that the samples should have been placed under 'proper custody' to prevent 'internal fermentation' to render the final results being useless.
Justice Joshi also said that evidence given by parking attendant Kalpesh Verma (PW-12) of JW Marriott Hotel in Juhu, did not imply that Salman Khan had driven the car.
He said, "Kalpesh Verma handed over the car to the actor when he came out of the hotel, but the witness was silent on the condition of the appellant-accused at that time. he parking attendant also saw Salman sitting in the driver's seat with the AC on and later closed the door after receiving tips (Rs 500), proceeded to keep it in a common box and on return saw the car going away."
The judge also analysed the evidence of a waiter, Malay Bag (PW-5), and a manager, Rizwan Ali Rakhangi (PW-9), at the Rain Bar, the place where the actor allegedly consumed alcohol before the accident.
He observed, "The trial court had not analysed whether these bills can be accepted to prove the drunkenness of the appellant-accused. During his examination by chief public prosecutor Sandeep Shinde, Malay Bag had pointed out that Salman had a 'white coloured glass' in his hand. However, during cross-examination by defence counsel Amit Desai he (Bag) had said it was a 'clear liquid'."
Malay Bag said that he is a regular visitor to the bar, but the defence counsel has said everyone who visits the bar does not necessarily consume alcohol," Justice Joshi observed. He also added that there was 'no concrete evidence' before the court from the two witnesses that (Salman Khan) had consumed alcohol there.
