New Delhi, April 18: Wrangling over Salman Khan's 2002 hit and run case continues. Defending his client, Defence on Friday said that the Indian Penal Code section, dealing with culpable homicide not amounting to murder was wrongly applied on the actor.
The Section 304 part II section stipulates a maximum punishment of 10 years jail.
Both Defence and prosecution is trying their best to prove their point in the case. While prosecution is trying his best to prove actor guilty, Defence is leaving no stone unturned to prove that Salman Khan is being implicated in false case.
Arguing before Additional Sessions Judge D. W. Deshpande, actor's lawyer Shrikant Shivade said, "The live link of the act and the death is snapped.
Tearing into prosecution claim, he further said, "The prosecution has not been able to prove that the death (of one pavement dweller) was caused because of the act".
During the past couple of days, Shivade had raised questions on the medical tests conducted on Salman within five minutes, how his vehicle was examined in 20 minutes, the competency of the chemical analyst and other aspects during his arguments in the re-trial of case currently underway before Judge Deshpande.
On Thursday, lawyer claimed that mishap took place due to a tyre burst, because of which the vehicle skid and it led to the incident.
Salman's defence team, in the past, has questioned the inclusion of Patil's evidence since he died of natural causes some years ago and could not be cross-examined.
When defence put up new twist in the case
Unveiling new twist in the case, the lawyer said that victim sustained serious injuries not in the mishap itself, but when the wrecked car fell on them while being lifted by a crane.
The prosecution's case is that Khan rammed his Toyota Land Cruiser into a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002, killing one and injuring four others.
"There are circumstances to suggest that the car dropped on the persons who were underneath when it was being lifted with the help of a crane brought by police after the mishap," said defence lawyer Shrikant Shivade in his final arguments before sessions judge D W Deshpande.
He read out statements of witnesses to argue that there were no blood-stains on bedsheets and pillow covers (the victims were sleeping on the sheets spread on steps of the bakery).
Nor was there any blood on the steps. The victims stated that they were dragged down by the impact. Had they been run over by the car, they would have been in the same position (stuck under wheels) but they stated that their position shifted, he said.
"This explains why no blood stains or tyre marks were found on the steps. Admittedly, the car had fallen on them when it was being lifted with the help of crane. The bumper too was intact but it had come off and was removed after the car was lifted," Shivade submitted.
The lawyer quoted Mohammed Abdulla and Narulla, who were caught under the car. "Because of the dragging of the car we found our position shifted a short distance away after the mishap. Till the car was lifted, the two of us were crying for help," he quoted from their statements.
If accident was the cause of injuries, would they be in the position to cry for help, the defence lawyer asked. While the prosecution's case is that the injured were removed and then the car was lifted, Khan's lawyer argued that the car was lifted first. The arguments would continue tomorrow.
(with inputs from agency)