‘Route taken by actor’s driver different from what prosecution claims’
According to Salman Khan’s lawyer, there is no evidence to show which road the car had actually come from before the accident.
Actor Salman Khan’s defence lawyer Thursday argued that the route taken by the actor’s driver, who was at the wheel when the 2002 hit-and-run accident took place, was different from what the prosecution has claimed.
Khan’s lawyer Shrikant Shivade argued that the actor’s driver had driven straight from Hill Road in Bandra when the front left tyre of Khan’s Landcruiser burst and the vehicle veered towards the left causing an accident. The prosecution, however, claims that the actor had taken a right turn from St Andrews Road when he lost control of the vehicle before he rammed into the pavement on September 28, 2002.
“The map prepared by the investigating officer indicating the angle at which the car has hit the pavement, supports the accused’s version of the case,” the defence lawyer, Shrikant Shivade.
Related
Khan’s driver had earlier claimed that he was driving and at a distance on Hill Road their front left tyre had burst.
There is no evidence to show which road the car had come from before the accident, except for the defence witness, who is the driver, Shivade said.
The lawyer also claimed that the complainant, Ravindra Patil, had stated that he did not know which road they had come to the accident spot from, which supports the defence claim that the complainant was sleeping through the incident.
Shivade also contended that the RTO inspector who inspected Khan’s car after the accident was a “liar”. The witness, according to Shivade, told the court that he had taken the keys of the vehicle for inspection and returned it in 20 minutes. “When he asked him how long it took to check the tyres, coolants, axles and test drive, individually, the total times sums up to 40-50 minutes,” Shivade argued.
The lawyer also submitted that the RTO inspector had kept changing the statement regarding when he actually inspected the vehicle. Shivade also contended that the inspector’s statement corroborates the defence case that the FIR was completed on September 29, 2002 and not a day before. “When the inspector asked the investigating officer for the FIR, the IO replied saying the FIR documents were still being prepared. The case that Salman Khan was driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol was always an afterthought,” Shivade claimed.
meghna.yelluru@expressindia.com
Source:: Indian Express
