Bail or Jail? Know 4 questions which entrapped Salman Khan in hit and run case

Finally verdict came in the thirteen year old hit and run case. A Mumbai Session court on Wednesday sentenced Bollywood superstar Salman Khan to 5 years in 2002 hit and run case. The court convicted the actor after holding him guilty in all the charges against him. Later Salman Khan got interim bail till Friday from the High Court.

One must be curious to know that despite the Defence argued so hard, how the actor got punished. Here are these four points which led Salman Khan's conviction in the case.

These are the questions which were either not answered satisfactorily by the Defence or the Judge didn't find answer up to the mark when the case was argued during the trail.

There are the points which helped prosecution to prove actor guilty in the case.

Statement by Ravindra Patil

During the trial, Defence kept on saying that that Salman was not driving the car but apparently the Court didn't buy it.

The reason being that Salman's police bodyguard Ravinder Patil in his statement had accepted earlier that the actor was at driver's seat when the accident happened.

Narrating the seating arrangements in the car on the fateful night, Patil who died of T.B in 2007 had said, "Salman sat in the driver's seat and I was sitting next to him. Kamaal was sitting in the rear".

Driver Ashok Singh's statement
The Defence produced 27 witnesses including Salman's driver Ashok Singh in the case.

Singh whose statement that Salman was not driving, instead he was at driver's seat gave new twist to the case. But it seems, the Defence didn't home work properly on the front.

Earlier, the Defence himself had informed the court that only three occupants were there in the car and those were Salman Khan, his police body guard and singer Kamal khan.

How both the statements could be justified at the same time? When Ashok Singh was not there in the car how can he drive the same?

'I was not drunk when accident took place'

Actor in his statement had informed the court that he was not drunk when the accident took place. Trying to prove his innocence, Salman had said that he didn't take wine and had water in wine glass when the accident happened.

But the statement was found to be wrong. In a medical test, it was confirmed that he was drunk. Even the lab analyzer had confirmed that his blood had more than permissible amount of wine.

Driving without license

Salman was accused that he was driving the car without the license of it when the unfortunate incident happened.

The RTO records had even confirmed it. Though the actor tried to prove this charge wrong by producing a 2004 license, but apparently the court didn't buy the argument as the license was not registered anywhere in the RTO's records.