<p>The prosecution in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case inform the Bombay High Court on Thursday that the actor had many chances — at least half a dozen times — to inform that he was not driving the car.<br /><br /></p>.<p>“Coming to the court after 13 years?....the inordinate and unexplainable delay in inform correct facts throws up other issues,” Public Prosecutor and government pleader Sandeep Shinde told Justice A R Joshi, who is hearing the appeal of the actor against his conviction and five-year jail term by the Mumbai Sessions Court in the September 28, 2002 drunken-driving and hit-and-run case. <br /><br />While the prosecution theory is that Salman, actor-singer Kamaal Khan and police constable Ravindra Patil were in the car that was driven by the actor in an inebriated condition, the defence claim is that besides these three persons, family drivers accompanied them — driver Altaf from Galaxy Apartments at Bandra to Rain Bar & Restaurant in Vile Parle to JW Marriott Hotel at Juhu-Tara Road from where another driver Ashok Singh took over. Singh was driving when the accident took place.<br /><br />“Ashok Singh has claimed that he was driving the car and police did not record his statement, Salman Khan could have said so in the Bandra Police Station....even if you did not want to say before the police, you could have said these in the three bail applications that you filed, one revision petition and when you challenged the applicability of 304, Part II of the IPC, first in the Bombay High Court and then the Supreme Court,” Shinde said seeking to demolish the defence theory. <br /><br />He also pointed out that when the division bench of the high court was hearing a PIL on the issue of compensation, Salman could have told the court he was not driving. <br /><br />During the course of arguments, Shinde referred extensively to the statement of Salman recorded under section 313 of the CrPC and the statement of Singh, the defence witness. According to Shinde, the first informant, police bodyguard late Ravindra Patil, who lodged the complaint, had not mentioned about Altaf or four persons being present in the car. Besides this, Kalpesh Verma, has seen Salman sitting in the driver’s seat and after receiving the tips closing the door of the car, also establishes that he was driving the car, he pointed out. He also added that another witness Francis Fernandes, who was present at the spot has said nothing about Singh. <br /><br /> </p>
<p>The prosecution in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case inform the Bombay High Court on Thursday that the actor had many chances — at least half a dozen times — to inform that he was not driving the car.<br /><br /></p>.<p>“Coming to the court after 13 years?....the inordinate and unexplainable delay in inform correct facts throws up other issues,” Public Prosecutor and government pleader Sandeep Shinde told Justice A R Joshi, who is hearing the appeal of the actor against his conviction and five-year jail term by the Mumbai Sessions Court in the September 28, 2002 drunken-driving and hit-and-run case. <br /><br />While the prosecution theory is that Salman, actor-singer Kamaal Khan and police constable Ravindra Patil were in the car that was driven by the actor in an inebriated condition, the defence claim is that besides these three persons, family drivers accompanied them — driver Altaf from Galaxy Apartments at Bandra to Rain Bar & Restaurant in Vile Parle to JW Marriott Hotel at Juhu-Tara Road from where another driver Ashok Singh took over. Singh was driving when the accident took place.<br /><br />“Ashok Singh has claimed that he was driving the car and police did not record his statement, Salman Khan could have said so in the Bandra Police Station....even if you did not want to say before the police, you could have said these in the three bail applications that you filed, one revision petition and when you challenged the applicability of 304, Part II of the IPC, first in the Bombay High Court and then the Supreme Court,” Shinde said seeking to demolish the defence theory. <br /><br />He also pointed out that when the division bench of the high court was hearing a PIL on the issue of compensation, Salman could have told the court he was not driving. <br /><br />During the course of arguments, Shinde referred extensively to the statement of Salman recorded under section 313 of the CrPC and the statement of Singh, the defence witness. According to Shinde, the first informant, police bodyguard late Ravindra Patil, who lodged the complaint, had not mentioned about Altaf or four persons being present in the car. Besides this, Kalpesh Verma, has seen Salman sitting in the driver’s seat and after receiving the tips closing the door of the car, also establishes that he was driving the car, he pointed out. He also added that another witness Francis Fernandes, who was present at the spot has said nothing about Singh. <br /><br /> </p>
