Key witness in Salman case turns hostile
December 20, 2006 21:30 IST

A prime witness in the hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan on Wednesday did not support the prosecution in the trial court and was declared hostile.

Mohammed Muslim Niyat Shaikh, who was injured when the actor allegedly rammed his car into a bakery on September 28, 2002, told the court that he had not seen the person on the wheel as he was hurt in the mishap and that passersby had surrounded him.

The prosecution immediately declared him hostile and Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta then cross examined him.

The witness told Mehta that he was injured in leg and he could not see the person who was driving the car when the mishap occurred. On January 3, prosecution would examine another witness who was also injured in the mishap.

One person was killed and four injured when actor Salman Khan allegedly rammed his car into the bakery on the ill-fated day.

Of the 60 witnesses, six have already deposed. Among them were Ravindra Patil and Ramasray Pandey. Patil was Salman's bodyguard and had accompanied him when the actor met with the accident, while Pandey was sleeping in a shop adjacent to the accident site.

The third witness was the one who had prepared panchnama (report) at the site of the accident and the fourth was Shaikh Ibrahim, cousin of the deceased, Narulla Salim Shaikh. The fifth, Mohammed Abdul Rauf Shaikh, deposed on June 29, while Mohammed Muslim Niyat Shaikh was examined on Thursday.

Earlier, witness Mohammed Abdul Rauf Shaikh, had contradicted his police statement during his deposition saying he and few others were sleeping on the footpath when a car had rammed into the bakery injuring them.

While giving evidence, Shaikh had disowned a crucial portion of his police statement, saying he had not seen Salman getting down from the driver's seat of the car. In a statement to police earlier, he said he had seen the actor getting down from the driver's seat after the mishap.

Shaikh had told the court he had heard people saying Salman come out of the car but he himself did not see the actor as he was underneath the vehicle which rammed into the bakery shop.

Witness to be grilled in Salman hit-and-run case
Press Trust of India

Mumbai, August 2, 2006

A court in Mumbai hearing a hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan on Wednesday allowed the prosecution to cross-examine a key witness who had contradicted a statement made to police during his deposition.

The witness, Mohammed Abdulla Rauf Shaikh, is one of four persons who was injured in the mishap when the actor allegedly rammed his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002.

Earlier, Shaikh had told the court that he and a few others were sleeping on the footpath when a car had hit the bakery, injuring them.

While giving evidence in court, Shaikh had disowned a crucial portion of his earlier statement to the police, saying he had not seen Salman getting out from the driver's seat of the car.

In his statement to police, however, he had said he had seen the actor getting out from the driver's seat after the accident.

Shaikh had told the court that he had heard people saying Salman car se bahar niklo (Salman come out of the car) but he himself did not see the actor as he was underneath the vehicle that rammed into the bakery.

The prosecution said today that it would like to cross- examine Shaikh on this point and sought to recall him to the box. The court accepted its plea and posted the matter for hearing on August 10.

Salman is charged with killing one person and injuring four others in the incident.


Key witness in Salman's hit-and-run case to depose tomorrow


MUMBAI, AUG ONE (PTI)
The prosecution will examine tomorrow a key witness in the hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan in which he is accused of killing one person and injuring four others, sources said.

The witness is one of the persons who was injured in the mishap when the actor rammed his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002.

Earlier, another witness, Mohammed Abdulla Rauf Shaikh, had told the court that he and few others were sleeping on the footpath when a car had rammed into the bakery injuring them.

While giving evidence, Mohammed had disowned a crucial portion of his police statement, saying he had not seen Salman getting down from the driver's seat of the car although he had told police earlier that he had seen the actor alight from the seat after the mishap.

Mohammed had told the court that he had heard people saying Salman 'car se bahar niklo' (Salman come out of the car) but he himself did not see the actor as he was underneath the vehicle which rammed into the bakery shop.

In keeping with a high court court directive, the actor had in 2002 deposited Rs ten lakh with the registrar to be paid as compensation to the victims.

Of the 60 witnesses, five have already deposed. Among them were Ravindra Patil and Ramasray Pandey, who had witnessed the incident. Patil was Salman's bodyguard and had accompanied him when the actor met with the accident, while Pandey was sleeping in a shop adjacent to the accident site.

The third witness was the one who had prepared panchnama at the site of the accident and the fourth was Shaikh Ibrahim, cousin of the deceased, Narulla Salim Shaikh. The fifth, Mohammed Abdul Rauf Shaikh, deposed on June 29.


Prosecution banks on scientist's testimony in Salman Khan case


By: Anand Holla

Aug 01,2006

The prosecution in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case of 2002 is yet to present what they consider their prime witness. D K Bhalshankar, who conducted the chemical analyser (CA) test at Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Kalina, had concluded that Salman was drunk in October 2002. This, the prosecution believes, will strengthen their case against the actor.
Another injured witness, Muslim Shaikh, will be examined at the Bandra metropolitan court tomorrow.
Investigating officer Kishan Shengal said, "The testimonies of constable Ravindra Patil and the injured witnesses are crucial to the case. But the prime witness is the person who conducted the CA test. As the report confirms that Salman was drunk, it backs up part of our case." In the CA report, 62 mg of alcohol was found in 4 ml of Salman's blood sample, which exceeded the permissible limit.
Former deputy chief minister Chhagan Bhujbal had stated that Salman had twice the permissible limit of alcohol in his blood, which was what the medical report collected by cops said.
Doctors say alcohol from the body is excreted within two hours and any remnants get diluted in six hours. On September 28, 2002, Salman was missing for eight hours after the accident. The accident occurred at 2.45 am and he was arrested at 10.45 am the next day. The actor was taken for the test at JJ Hospital at 2 pm. So the chances of finding alcohol in his body had waned.
Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta added that the report that was filed with the chargesheet isn't very crucial to the case.


A sigh of relief for Salman Khan!


by Debasis Jana

Salman Khan finally got a sigh of relief after the key witness in the 2002 hit-and-run case, Mohammed Abdul Kaufsheikh, told yesterday a trial court that he had not seen Salman driving the car when the incident occurred.
It can be remembered here, the same Abdul Kaufsheikh told police in a statement made after the mishap that he had seen Salman getting out of the driver's seat.
However yesterday Kaufsheikh took a U-turn and told the court that he had not seen Salman getting out of the driver's seat of the car because he was underneath the vehicle.
The witness said on September 28, 2002, the day of the accident, he was fast asleep outside a bakery. On being hurt, he opened his eyes and found himself underneath the car.
He said he heard people shouting "Salman Khan came out of the car" but he had not seen the actor.
In 2002, Salman had allegedly rammed his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra, killing one person and injuring four.


Finally, a good news for Sallu


Actor Salman Khan, facing charges of killing one person in a road accident four years ago, had a breather Thursday when a witness retracted his earlier statement indicting the Bollywood star.

Abdul Rauf Sheikh, an eyewitness in the 2002 case in which an inebriated Khan is alleged to have rammed his car into a bakery in western Mumbai killing one and injuring four, turned hostile in a city court.

Sheikh retracted his earlier statement to police that he saw Khan coming out of the car after the accident.

Of the 60 witnesses in the case, four have already deposed before the court. Among them were Ravindra Patil and Ramasray Pandey, who had witnessed the incident.

Patil was Salman's bodyguard and was with him at the time of the accident while Pandey was sleeping in a shop near the accident site.

All witnesses had earlier supported the prosecution's case.

The change in Sheikh's stance has come as a breather to the star, who was Wednesday issued a show-cause notice by a Rajasthan court for allegedly misleading
it in a poaching case.


"I Didn't See Salman"

MUMBAI: Mohammed Abdul Rauf Shaikh, one of the four bakery workers run over by actor Salman Khan's Land Cruiser in September 2002, stepped into the Bandra court for the first time on Thursday and said he never saw the actor at the accident site as he (Shaikh) was surrounded by people.

Shaikh, who now works in another Bandra bakery, said he heard people shouting "Salman bahar niklo". In his police statement after the incident, he had said he had seen Salman, who was driving the vehicle, step down even as people shouted at him.

His statement that he did not see Salman will not go against the prosecution case, said prosecutor Neeta Pasarkar. She said Shaikh, as the fourth prosecution witness, had in many other ways supported the police case as he confirmed that the car had rammed into the bakery outside which he and other workers were sleeping and it had run over him.

Besides, Shaikh also said he heard people shouting out Salman's name. Salman has been exempted from court appearance in the trial.

So far, two witnesses have said they saw Salman at the accident site. The first witness, Salman's police bodyguard Ravindra Patil, after several bouts of disappearance completed his evidence in the trial after telling the court that he was in the car with the actor and had asked the actor to slow down.

But in his cross examination by the defence, he said Salman was not drunk and was not driving rashly. Another witness, local milkman Ram Pandey, earlier said he saw Salman getting off the car.

For the prosecution, the issue was not so much about Salman's presence at the site as much as it was to prove he was driving rashly. Shaikh said he "was sleeping when he felt a heavy object going over his legs". When he opened his eyes he was under the vehicle.

"I was pulled out and later taken to Bhabha civic hospital in an auto". The defence lawyers asked him if he was removed after 10-15 minutes and he replied "aaram se (easily)" .

The defence was trying to show that he had not seen Salman because of the time that passed till his removal to the hospital. He said police had come to the site and sent him to hospital. He also said he could not see the right side of the car (where the driver sits).

Another victim will depose on August 2. Salman has been charged with various offences. A graver section of culpable homicide with prior knowledge was dropped by the SC which said the trial court could invoke it if necessary.



Witness Says He Did Not See Salman " Getting Out Of The Driverīs Seat"


One of the witnesses in the 2002 hit-and-run case ( Mohammed Abdul Kaufsheikh) , involving Bollywood actor Salman Khan has told the trial court in Bombay that he had not seen the star driving the car when the incident occurred. Retracting his earlier statement, the witness told the court that he had not seen Salman getting out of the driver's seat of the car because he was underneath the vehicle.

Reportedly , the witness had said on September 28, 2002, the day of the accident, he was fast asleep outside a bakery. On heing hurt, he opened his eyes and found himself underneath the car. He is also reported to have said that that he had seen Salman getting out of the driver's seat.

He now says that he heard people shouting "Salman Khan " but he had not seen the actor.

Salman had allegedly rammed his car into a bakery in subruban Bandra, killing one person and injuring four, according to prosecution.


Five witnesses in Salman Khan's hit-and-run case discharged

MUMBAI, MAR 31 (PTI)

In a new twist to the hit-and-run case involving film actor Salman Khan, a local court today discharged five witnesses after prosecution said it did not wish to examine them.

The five witnesses appeared before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate J B Pankhe but the court discharged them on prosecution plea.

These witnesses are employees of J W Marriot Hotel where the actor had gone just before he rammed his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra, killing one person and injuring four on September 28, 2002.

They had earlier given statements to police saying Salman had a glass of water when he came to the hotel before the accident. Their version is corroborated with statements of guests who were present in the 'Rain' bar of the hotel when the actor arrived.

However, the case of the prosecution is that the actor had a couple of drinks at a party hosted by his actor brother Sohail Khan at J W Marriot Hotel just before Salman met with the accident.

The prosecution chose to discharge the witnesses as it felt that no material could be gathered from them. The court was told that the prosecution did not wish to rely upon these five witnesses.

The trial has been deferred till April 12. The prosecution has given a list of 60 witnesses. Of these, two have been examined so far.

'Salman was driving the car'
By: Anand Holla   March 24, 2006
 
Ram Asare Pandey, a dairy owner at Hill Road, Bandra, 50 metres from the accident spot, saw Salman inside the Land Cruiser
The second witness in Salman Khan’s hit-and-run case deposed favouring the prosecution yesterday at the Bandra metropolitan court.

Ram Asare Pandey (44), who runs Pandey Dairy at Hill Road, Bandra — 50 metres from the accident spot — told the court that he saw Salman inside the Toyota Land Cruiser that crashed into sleeping A-1 Bakery workers the night of the accident.
“I saw Salman Khan get down from the driving seat. I could only identify him. Salman went away from the scene with another person from the car. Later on, I came to know that the one who was still standing beside the car was his bodyguard”, he said.
 But there were some snags, as Pandey’s statement in court showed minor discrepancies from his statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Under this section a witness records his statement before a magistrate, who if the witness turns hostile can be called to depose before the court.
However, even a minor deviation from that recorded statement can harm the case.When the defence cross-examined Pandey, he said that he had gone to the Bandra police station three days after the incident to give his statement. But in his original statement in 2002, he had said that the police themselves had come to his home the day after the incident to record his statement. To this, Pandey said, “I don’t remember every detail.
Thoda aage peeche ho sakta hai.” But fortunately for the prosecution, Judge J B Panke pacified the defence, saying, “That’s OK. We have to derive the meaning from this.”The next hearing of the case is on March 31. Public Prosecutor G G Nagrale said that, of the 64 witnesses, he would be examining only about a dozen strong ones. “Two other witnesses who saw Salman running away from the accident scene will be examined.”


So, was Salman drunk or not?

By: Anand Holla March 17, 2006

As Salman Khan’s former bodyguard Ravindra Patil’s cross-examination came to an end yesterday, it was difficult to gauge which of his two statements — the first admission or the second one — was true.

Patil (29) had admitted in his supplementary statement on October 1, 2002, that the actor was drunk when he killed a pavement dweller and injured four others while driving on September 28. Yesterday, he stood by this statement during his cross-examination in court.

However, in his first statement, on the day of the accident, and an exclusive interview to MiD DAY the next day, Patil did not mention that the actor was drunk.

During the 30-minute court proceedings, Patil admitted speaking to
MiD DAY in 2002. “I had then given the interview without seeking permission from my superiors,” Patil told the court.

Advocate Dipesh Mehta said, “In his accounts to MiD DAY and the FIR, Patil said Salman wanted to avoid hitting an electric pole and took a sharp turn when he rammed into a shop and killed the man. Neither does Patil talk about the actor being drunk nor does he mention telling him to drive carefully.

Public prosecutor G G Nagrale said, “We objected to the MiD DAY article being mentioned in court as a part of police investigation.”

When asked how he felt after the end of his court ordeal, a tired Patil said, “Please don’t ask me anything. Bahut ho gaya yaar.”

Patil’s supplementary statement

When Salman came out of Rain Bar with Kamal Khan, I noticed that he was drunk. After he began driving rashly, I told him, “Aap gaadi tez mat chalao.” I pleaded with him repeatedly to slow down but he ignored me.

Moments before the accident occurred at Hill Road junction, I told him to slow down again as anything could happen. But he did not listen and rammed into the American Express Bakery.

http://web.mid-day.com/news/city/2006/march/133140.htm
Salman in trouble due to his driver’s deposition
Mumbai, Mar 16

Salman Khan seems to be in for more trouble. Ravindra Patil, his driver at the time of the hit and run accident that had killed one person and injured four in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002, has reiterated his statement that Salman was driving the car himself and was drunk.

Patil reiterated his statement today during the cross-examination and also emphasised that he had advised Salman not to drive the car as he was under the influence of liquor.

However, Dipesh Mehta, Salman’s lawyer, said that it is the initial stage of the case and not much should be read into Patil’s statement. He also added that Patil has only reiterated his earlier statement and there are other important witnesses in the case.

Bureau Report

Salman was drunk while driving, says witness
Thursday, 16 March , 2006, 19:50

Mumbai: Ravindra Patil, former bodyguard of actor Salman Khan and prime witness in a hit-and-run case, on Thursday reiterated his statement given to police that Salman was under the influence of alcohol on September 28, 2002, when he rammed his car into a bakery killing one person and injuring four others.
Patil told Salman’s lawyer Dipesh Mehta during cross-examination that he had cautioned Salman not to drive in a rash manner or else he would meet with an accident but the actor had not paid heed to his advice.

Although Patil had not stated this in FIR lodged by him after the incident, he had improved his statement eight days later by telling police that the actor had under the influence of alcohol and also that he had cautioned Salman against rash driving.

During cross-examination, the witness agreed with defence lawyer that the improvement made by him in his statement to police was indeed correct.

However, he admitted that a newspaper report quoting him about Salman taking a sharp turn to dodge an electric pole just before the accident was also correct.

The witness denied that he had been tutored by police to implicate Salman and also refuted allegations that he had merely signed the improved statement at the instance of police.

sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14163779

Salman Khan in a soup

Bollywood superstar Salman Khan’s luck doesn’t seem to be on his side as Ravindra Patil, the prime witness in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case, stood by his testimony on Thursday. Earlier Patil gave statement to the police that the actor was driving under the influence of alcohol when he rammed his vehicle into a bakery, killing one and injuring four others on September 28, 2002. This being a high profile celebrity case, the whole media is covering every aspect of the case

Patil reiterated that Khan was drunk when he was behind the wheel on September 28, 2002 and further told that Salman Khan was driving his Landcruiser at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph, and, he was seated beside Salman Khan when the Bollywood star lost control of the car and drove over people sleeping on a Hill Road sidewalk killing one of them. It may be noted that Patil absconded and though next day, a non-bailable warrant was issued against him—Patil failed to appear in court for cross-examination on four occasions.

Later, on March 11, the Crime Branch sleuths traced and arrested Patil from a Mahabaleshwar hotel. Ravindra Patil gave the statement to the Bandra Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court as he was cross-examined by Khan’s defence lawyers on Thursday.
The defence was seeking to establish that Patil had given two different statements but Patil denied having given false statements under pressure from the police and stated that he had given his statement of his own accord.

Salman Khan’s defence lawyer Dipesh Mehta reportedly told, ‘‘It will not weaken our defence. He is, after all, the prosecution’s witness. We will call several witnesses in the future and I’m sure the court will not decide the matter on one person’s statements alone.’’

The next hearing is reported to be scheduled on March 23. Patil’s statement being a deciding factor, let’s see what turn the case takes now.

In the past few years, Salman was involved in a lot of allegations and court cases, starting from the Aishwarya Rai threatening phone call case to the hunting of endangered species to this drunk driving case. And the whole of Bollywood and the world is watching whats going to happen next !!

www.desifans.com

CONSTABLE WHO WAS WITH ACTOR STICKS TO EARLIER STATEMENT, SAYS HE WARNED KHAN AGAINST SPEEDING

 

Salman was drunk, lost control of car, says witness
Express News Service Mumbai, March 16

SALMAN Khan was driving the Landcruiser when it crashed into the American Express Bakery, Bandra, on September 28, 2002, killing one person and injuring four others. And he was drunk at the time.

Sticking to his earlier deposition against the actor, this is what suspended police constable Ravindra Patil, the prime witness and complainant in the Salman Khan hit-and-run case, told the Bandra Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court as he was cross-examined by Khan’s defence lawyers on Thursday.Patil, who was attached to the Special Branch (Protection) in 2002,
was Khan’s bodyguard and seated next to the actor inside the car on the night of the incident.

Patil last deposed against Khan before the same court on February 6, following which he went into hiding. The next day, a non-bailable warrant was issued against him—Patil failed to appear in court for cross-examination on four occasions.

More than a month later, on March 11, the Crime Branch arrested Patil from a Mahabaleshwar hotel.

As defence advocate Sampat Mehta questioned Patil’s statements against Khan, he denied having given false statements under pressure from the police and said that he had given his statement of his own accord.

Patil reiterated that Khan was drunk before getting into the vehicle and that he had been warned against driving in an inebriated condition.

He also confirmed that Khan was driving at a speed of 90 to 100 kmph, and, in his drunk state, lost control of the car.

‘‘It will not weaken our defence. He is, after all, the prosecution’s witness,’’ said defence advocate Dipesh Mehta. ‘‘We will call several witnesses in the future and I’m sure the court will not decide the matter on one person’s statements alone.’’

The next hearing is scheduled for March 23.
Expressindia

 

Missing witness' relative in Salman case files complaint
Dharmendra Tiwari
Sunday, March 05, 2006 23:45 IST

In another twist to the Salman Khan hit-and-run case, the brother of constable Ravindra Patil—a key witness in the case—approached the police on Friday, and registered a missing complaint. Ravindra was Salman's bodyguard and was in the actor's car at the time of the accident.

Salman is charged with killing one person and injuring four others by ramming his car into a bakery in Bandra on September 28, 2002.

According to sources, Ravindra's brother registered the missing complaint at the Bhoiwada police station. Ravindra has not been in touch with his family for the past several months. The Bhoiwada police confirmed that a missing compliant was registered on Friday evening.

Ravindra had allegedly told the police that Salman was under the influence of liquor when the accident occurred.

But he failed to turn up at the Bandra court for the last five hearings-on February 6, 7, 10, 16 and March 2. The court has taken serious notice of the police's inability to find out Ravindra's whereabouts, and issued a non-bailable warrant against him.

The case will come up for hearing on March 16 now. According to sources, the house in the Naigaon police quarters where Ravindra stayed, is presently locked.

http://dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1016475&CatID=1
 
Salman paid customs duty for the car: ED
Pranati Mehra
Sunday, March 05, 2006 01:03:51 amTIMES NEWS NETWORK

MUMBAI: Why is the enforcement directorate (ED) investigating the import of Salman Khan's Land Cruiser? The answer may open a can of worms regarding import of foreign cars.

ED sources said that Salman seems to have paid only Rs 14 lakh towards customs duty for the car. 'How did he then pay for the car?' the ED wants to know. The vehicle was involved in a fatal accident at Bandra.

Documents available with TOI reveal that Salman had 'paid' about Rs 16 lakh—all towards duties and registration—in a deal with the importer. Apparently Chikki Pandey, actor Chunky Pandey's brother, was the middleman.

The vehicle had been imported by one Mohammed Abdul Rahiman Hassainar, resident of Kasargod in Kannur, Kerala on 29 January 2001. On arrival from Sharjah, he entered into an agreement with Salman.

Rahiman mortgaged the vehicle to Salman for a total of Rs 16,25,939 for two years, and left India for Dubai on February 7, 2002. It was obvious that he was a carrier for the vehicle

The break-up was: Rs 12.05 lakh and Rs 1.80 lakh towards customs duty and Rs 2,40,939 to the RTO for registration. Rahiman gave Salman power of attorney in May 2001 to use his car.

He had signed an affidavit on a Rs 20 stamp paper for the loan amount, and Salman signed a paper with details of three cheques on it. Since Rahiman could not pay back the loan, the vehicle was forfeited. It now belongs to Salman.

Asked how the actor had paid only Rs 16 lakh for the car, Salman's father Salim Khan said, "If the car is not yet registered in his name, why would he make full payment? He has not paid anything more, but the agencies don't seem to believe us," he said.

Which throws up other questions like who is the mysterious seller who parted with the vehicle for nothing? If the duty was Rs 13.8 lakh, the car would be worth Rs nine lakh.

Did other buyers of such vehicles use the same method under the transfer of residence facility? Is there a bigger crime involved in the import of used foreign vehicles?

Hearing in Salman's hit-and-run case adjourned
United News of India

Mumbai, March 4, 2006

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate JB Pankhe adjourned the hearing in the hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan to March 16.

The key witness failed to turn up before the court for the third consecutive time though a non-bailable warrant was issued against him last month.

Cross examination of Police Constable Ravindra Patil, the key witness in the hit-and-run case, was adjourned to March 16 as he is absconding.

Defence counsel Dipesh Mehta said that the court had directed the police to execute the warrant and bring him before the court to start cross-examination.

On September 28, 2002, Salman Khan's Land Cruiser had allegedly rammed into a bakery at Bandra, killing one person and injuring four others.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1641975,001100030009.htm

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1438357.cms

Salman's car may cause fresh trouble
Pranati Mehra
Sunday, March 05, 2006 12:14:02 amTIMES NEWS NETWORK

MUMBAI: The enforcement directorate is investigating the import of filmstar Salman Khan's ill-fated Land Cruiser because he seems to have gotten away with paying only Rs 14 lakh as customs duty.

Officials told TOI on Saturday that they want to know how he paid for the car itself and who was the mysterious seller willing to part with the vehicle for nothing?

They are also exploring the angle that the cars imports may be a cover for a larger crime. The answers may open a can of worms, as several other celebrities have bought such foreign cars under the transfer of residence provisions.

However, documents available with the TOI reveal that Salman actually 'paid' about Rs 16 lakh all towards duties and for registration in a loan-mortagage deal with the importer. Apparently, actor Chunky Pandey's brother Chikki was the middleman.

The vehicle had been imported by one Mohammed Abdul Rahiman Hassainar, a resident of house No. KMC 15217, Kadavath, Kassargod, Kannur district, Kerala on January 29, 2001.

On arrival in India from Sharjah, he entered into a loan agreement with Salman since he said he did not have the money to pay for the customs duty for the car.

Abdul Rahiman mortgaged his Land Cruiser to Salman for a total of Rs 16,25,939 for two years and left India for Dubai on February 7, 2002. It is obvious that he was not going to use the car in India and was a carrier for the vehicle which could otherwise not be imported.

The break-up of the amount is: Rs 12.05 lakhs and Rs 1.80 lakhs towards customs duty by way of two cheques) and Rs 2,40,939 to the RTO for registration. In fact, the importer gave Salman a power of attorney in May 2001 to use and maintain his car.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1438283.cms


Enforcement Directorate questions Salman Khan

Mumbai, Feb. 23 (PTI):

Bollywood star Salman Khan, was today questioned by the Enforcement Directorate regarding his Toyota Landcruiser, which allegedly rammed into a shop in suburban Bandra in September 2002, killing one person and injuring four.

Salman was called by ED to answer questions with regard to purchase of the imported car, ED sources said.

The actor's lawyer Deepesh Mehta, however, said that it was a routine inquiry which ED normally does to every person who purchases imported car, about whether duties have been paid.

Salman has already given a statement that he purchased the car from a person who came here from Dubai after three years of stay. He also produced necessary documents in this regard.

The car was earlier seized by police at the time of the accident, but later returned to the actor on his request. Salman is still facing trial in the hit and run case.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200602231964.htm


Salman's hit-and-run case hearing deferred

February 16, 2006 19:33 IST

An eyewitness in the hit-and-run case, involving actor Salman Khan, failed to turn up on Thursday in the trial court, which deferred the matter to March two for further hearing.

This is the third time eyewitness Ravindra Patil has failed to appear. The court has taken a serious view of the absence of the witness and warned him to appear at the next hearing.

A non-bailable warrant issued against him for non-appearance earlier is pending execution, Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta told PTI.

The court had issued the NBW against Patil, the police guard of the actor, on February 7 when he failed to turn up. Again on February 10, Patil did not appear and the court re-issued the warrant, asking him to appear on February 16.

Salman Khan is charged with killing a person and injuring four by ramming his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002. The deposition of Patil is considered significant, as he had reportedly told police that he had advised the actor not to drive rashly or else he will meet with an accident.

Patil also told police that Salman was under the influence of liquor and did not pay heed to his advise. However, during cross-examination, Patil told the defence lawyer that Salman was quite normal while driving and that he had raised an alarm that the wheel was not turning when the actor's vehicle turned to avoid a pole coming in the way.

Salman has denied the charges of getting drunk before driving and also refuted allegations that he was driving rashly.
 
Salman witness fails to appear in court

An eyewitness in the hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan on Thursday failed to turn up in the trial court which deferred the matter to March 2 for further hearing.

This is the third time eyewitness Ravindra Patil has failed to appear. A non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against him for non-appearance earlier is pending execution, Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta said.

The court had issued the NBW against Patil, police guard of the actor, on February 7 when he failed to turn up. Again on February 10 Patil did not appear and the court re-issued the warrant by asking him to appear on February 16.

The court has taken a serious view of the absence of the witness and warned him to appear on March 2 without fail.

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/nmirror/mmpaper.asp?sectid=2&articleid=21620062217571562162006221755750
 
Salman case: Witness fumbles for words
Press Trust of India
Mumbai, February 6, 2006

In an interesting turn in the hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan, a prime witness on Monday fumbled for words before the trial court.

Ravindra Patil, former police guard of Salman, was confronted with contradictions in his police complaint and interview appearing in a section of the media, a day after the mishap.

Patil was answering questions put to him during cross-examination by defence lawyer Dipesh Mehta.

Salman is charged with killing one person and injuring four by ramming his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002.

The witness was confronted with his interview in Mid Day, a day after the incident in which he had said that the actor was normal before getting on to the wheel. The interview also mentioned Patil saying that Salman had told him that the wheel was not turning just before he rammed the car into a bakery after dodging an electric pole.

The witness told the defence lawyer that the contents of the interview were correct.

However, in the police complaint he had not stated so, the court was told. The cross-examination was inconclusive and will continue on Tuesday.


http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1618718,000900040001.htm
 
Judgment day for Salman
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
Mumbai, Feb. 3: Salman Khan's fate in the 2002 hit-and-run case could be decided tomorrow when his lawyer cross-examines the only eye-witness to the accident that killed one person.

The actor's lawyer, Dipesh Mehta, is scheduled to cross-examine police constable Ravindra Patil, also the complainant in the case, before a metropolitan court in Bandra at 3 in the afternoon.

Patil's revelations could prove to be crucial to the judgment at a later stage.

The constable, who was Salman's bodyguard when the accident took place, had earlier told police in his statement that on September 28, 2002, he had advised the Bollywood star to drive slowly, but a drunk Salman ignored him. Soon after, the actor — at the wheels of a Toyota Land Cruiser — failed to negotiate a sharp right turn and rammed into a pavement near American Bakery on Bandra's Hill Road, where five bakery employees were sleeping.

"Patil had not said this in the original FIR lodged at the Bandra police station. His statement that Salman drove rashly came in the second statement recorded by the police after the public outcry. We feel it was not a voluntary disclosure by Patil," Mehta told The Telegraph today.
 
Hit-and-run case: Eyewitness to be cross-examined
[ Friday, February 03, 2006 04:34:02 pmPTI ] NRIs Grab Free DVD RSS Feeds| SMS NEWS to 8888 for latest updates
MUMBAI: An eye witness in the hit-and-run case, wherein actor Salman Khan is charged with killing one person and injuring four by ramming his car into a bakery in suburban Bandra in 2002, will be cross-examined on Saturday.

The witness, Ravindra Patil, will be cross-examined by Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta on the evidence tendered by him that the actor had driven his car rashly despite Patil's advice to drive cautiously.

Patil appeared before the court on Wednesday in response to a bailable warrant issued against him for failure to appear earlier.

The cross-examination began with a set of formal questions and would continue tomorrow, Mehta said.

The examination of Patil is considered significant in legal circles as he had cautioned the actor to drive carefully. In cases of negligence, the court considers this aspect before giving its verdict.

Moreover, Patil is the complainant in the case and on the basis of his statement the actor was arrested, according to prosecution.

However, Salman's lawyer said he would attempt to demolish the witness by establishing that he was not telling the truth. "But it would be too early to say how would the witness respond tomorrow", he said.

The prosecution has alleged that Salman had rammed his Toyota Land Cruiser into a bakery in suburban Bandra killing one person and four others who were sleeping on the pavement outside the shop on September 28, 2002.
 
Cross examination of prime witness commences
Mumbai | February 02, 2006 9:39:28 PM IST
Cross examination of key witness and police constable Ravindra Patil in the hit-and-run case involving Bollywood actor Salman Khan commenced today in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate J B Pankhe at Bandra.
Patil, against whom the court had issued bailable warrant at the last hearing for his failure to appear after the completion of his examination, appeared today.

Patil's cross examination by Salman Khan's counsel Dipesh Mehta remained inconclusive and it will continue on Saturday.

Salman Khan's 'Land Cruiser' had rammed into a Bakery at Pali Hill, Bandra, on September 28, 2002, in which one person was killed and four others injured.

webindia123.com
 
Court issues bailable warrant
Mumbai January 19, 2006 9:39:26 PM IST
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, today issued bailable warrant against the prime witness in the hit-and-run case, involving Bollywood actor Salman Khan, for his failure to appear in the court for cross examination.
The bailable warrant was issued by Additional Metropolitan Magistrate J B Pankhe against Salman Khan's former bodyguard Ravindra Patil, who was accompanying the actor at the time of the incident in which one person was killed.
The warrant is returnable on February two.
Salman Khan's 'Land Cruiser' had rammed into the Bakery at Pali Hill, Bandra, on September 28, 2002, killing one person and injuring four others.
The trial in the case has already commenced. Patil's examination had been completed and had to be cross-examined.
 
Bollywood star grilled for hit-and-run
Tue, 17 Jan 2006
Lawyers trying to put Bollywood star Salman Khan behind bars for an alleged hit-and-run incident in Mumbai, India, have been given a boost from the actor's bodyguard.
Ravindra Kindra, who was travelling with Khan when he crashed into a bakery in September 2002, told a court in Bandra on Friday that the actor was driving with undue care and attention.
The bodyguard claimed in court that he warned Khan to drive more carefully minutes before the tragedy.
According to police, Khan killed one person and injured another four before leaving the scene of the accident. Patil contacted the authorities.
The actor later surrendered and was arrested by police after a case was registered against him.
Khan maintains his innocence and his lawyer Dipesh Mehta is keen to cross-examine Patil when the trial resumes on 19 January.
"We shall grill Patil on January 19 and seek to demolish his claim about cautioning Salman," Mehta told the Times of India.
Bodyguard implicates Salman in accident
January 15, 2006 15:22 IST Last Updated: January 15, 2006 19:06 IST
The prosecution's case in the hit-and-run case involving Bollywood star Salman Khan has received a boost with an eyewitness telling the trial court that the actor drove rashly on September 28, 2002, killing one and injuring four when his car rammed into a bakery.
The witness, Ravindra Patil, who was accompanying Salman as police bodyguard in the same car that met with the mishap, told the suburban Bandra magistrate that he had warned the actor not to drive rashly or he would meet with an accident but Khan ignored his advice.
The examination of the witness has concluded in the trial court and Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta is all set to cross-examine him on January 19.
"We shall grill Patil on January 19 and seek to demolish his claim about cautioning Salman", Mehta told PTI.
The trial in the case began early this month, after the Supreme Court dismissed Salman's plea seeking in-camera proceedings during the examination of key eye witness Ravindra Patil.
 
Order rejecting Salman Khan�s appeal for in-camera trial stayed
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 9:58:30 IST
Actor charged with driving drunk, killing men is shy of media attention; can challenge the rejection in apex court in a month.. for :


The Bombay High Court again stood by actor Salman Khan yesterday by staying its own order. In September, the court had rejected the actor�s plea for in-camera trial of the accident case against him. The actor had initially sought the entire trail to be done in-camera but had later on sought the direction of the court to at least examine police constable Ravindra Patil, the lone eye witness to the entire episode, in seclusion, away from the media.
Salman Khan facing trial in case of accident he caused on September 28, 2002 at the American Express Bakery in Bandra, killing one person sleeping on the footpath outside a bakery and injuring two others. On October 6, 2003, 10 charges were framed against Salman even as the actor had pleaded not guilty. As the trial began, Salman had filed an application in the Bandra court, seeking for the trial to be done in-camera. The contention of the actor was that the trial attracts undue media publicity and hence it should not be done in open court.
The Metropolitan Magistrate court had rejected the actor�s plea on June 17 on the grounds that only the trials in offences such as a rape case where there is the need for hiding the identity of the victim are held in camera. There is no need for hiding anyone�s identity in the trial against the actor, the grounds cited by the actor were not relevant to ask for in-camera trial and hence the trial will be held in open court.
Salman had challenged the order of the Bandra Metropolitan Magistrate court in the High Court. Salman�s lawyer Dipesh Mehta pleaded before justice V.K.Tahilramani that media was going overboard in reporting this case. He said interviews of witnesses appeared in newspapers which prejudiced the minds of the court and the people. Salman later changed the plea, limiting the demand to have in-camera statement of constable Ravindra Patil who was his bodyguard when the accident took place.
Patil had in his statement before police mentioned that he had warned Salman not to drive so rashly or else he would meet with an accident. But the actor did not pay any heed to his advice. Patil has been hogging media attention after this statement. He has even made allegations that he had been threatened to change his statement by the actor�s family.
Salman�s lawyer, Dipesh Mehta argued that because of media attention the witnesses are likely to be influenced and would not tell the truth before the court. He urged the court to allow in-camera deposition of at least the main witness. However, on September 19 the court had rejected the plea of the actor.
The High Court has now given Salman a temporary reprieve enabling him to make an appeal in the Supreme Court within a month, against the High Court�s order dated September 19 rejecting his plea. The High Court order means that the trial in the Metropolitan Court will be put on hold till the apex court decides the issue
Salman in-camera plea hearing tomorrow- By: PTI July 3, 2005
The Bombay High Court will tomorrow hear a petition by actor Salman Khan seeking to quash a lower court's order which had rejected his plea for in-camera trial in a hit-and-run case. Salman is facing the charge of killing one person and injuring four by ramming his vehicle into a shop in 2002. Hearing Salman's plea, Justice V Tahilramani had adjourned the matter till July 4. On June 17, a magistrate had rejected Salman's plea for in-camera trial saying the grounds cited by the actor did not make out a case for such trial. He also noted that in-camera trial is normally held in cases of rape or unnatural offences to protect the identity of victim or witnesses but in this case it is not justified.

source: mid-day.com

Court exempts Salman from appearance - Midday: August 19, 2004
A local court on Thursday exempted actor Salman Khan from personal appearance in a hit-and-run case and deferred the trial to September 10 as case papers had not been transferred from the sessions court.
On a plea made by Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta saying the actor was busy in a film shooting, a Bandra magistrate exempted Salman from appearing today.
The court also called for the case papers from sessions court and deferred the matter to September 10 for trial.
Salman is charged with ramming his vehicle into a shop in suburban Bandra, killing one person and injuring four, on September 28, 2002. Police alleged that he was under the influence of liquor at the time of mishap.
Principal sessions judge R R Vachha, hearing Maharashtra government's plea, on June 9, had transferred the case from the court of magistrate S Y Sishode to the court of Additional Chief Magistrate J B Pankhe.
The state had urged that Sishode was not competent to conduct the trial as he had earlier recorded statements of three witnesses.
 
Trial begins on August 19 - Midday: June 10, 2004
The trial of actor Salman Khan in the hit-andrun case will finally begin on August 19 and will be conducted by additional chief metropolitan magistrate J B Phankhe at Bandra.
The stalemate over who would conduct the trial came to an end on Wednesday with principal sessions judge R R Vachha transferring the case from the court of magistrate S Y Sishode to the court of the ninth additional chief magistrate Phankhe.
The order came in response to a Maharashtra government plea which urged that the seriousness of the case merited a trial by a senior magistrate.
Salman's lawyer Dipesh Mehta consented to the state's plea since he too wanted the trial to commence soon. In any case, Sishode was last month transferred to 26th court in Mazagaon and hence would no longer be able to conduct the trial in Bandra, said lawyers.
 
Decks Cleared for Trial - Midday: June 09, 2004
Decks were today cleared for the trial of Bollywood actor Salman Khan in a hit-and-run case, with a sessions court ordering a Bandra Magistrate to conduct the proceedings from August 19.
On a Maharashtra government plea, principal judge R R Vachha transferred the case from the court of magistrate S Y Sishode to the court of additional chief magistrate J B Pankhe.
The state had filed an appeal against a lower court order allowing magistrate Sishode to conduct the trial of Salman who is facing the charge of killing one person and injuring four by ramming his vehicle into a shop in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate R D Gate had earlier rejected the state's petition challenging the jurisdiction of Sishode's court to try Salman in the rash-and-negligent driving case. The state had contended that Magistrate Sishode was not competent to conduct the trial.
As its plea was turned down, the state filed an appeal in a sessions court.
The actor's lawyer Dipesh Mehta pleaded that the state had not raised the jurisdiction issue when charges were framed against Salman on October six last year and also when the Supreme Court had directed Bandra Magistrate to try him and contended it is now challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court only to delay the trial.
The prosecution urged that Bandra Magistrate S Y Sishode was not competent to conduct the trial as he had earlier recorded statements of three witnesses in this case. Under section 164 CrPC, such a Magistrate had to transfer the case to other court for trial, it argued.
The Supreme Court had, on December 18, asked the court in Bandra to go ahead with the case and decide during the course of trial whether the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder was applicable to the actor or not.
The prosecution, however, raised objection in the trial court saying the same Magistrate had earlier recorded statements of three witnesses. Section 164 (6) of CrPC provides that such a Magistrate should refer the statements to another Magistrate who is conducting the trial.
The Supreme Court gave a major reprieve to Salman on December 18 by directing the Bandra Magistrate to try him for charges excluding "culpable homicide not amounting to murder" in a hit-and-run case which attracts ten years in jail.
The apex court held that the sessions court order framing this charge and High Court order quashing it were not tenable in law as this question could be decided at the stage of the trial and not before.
On October six, a Magistrate framed 10 charges against Salman. The actor pleaded not guilty to all the charges framed against him under provisions of IPC, Motor Vehicles Act and Bombay Prohibition Act. The maximum punishment prescribed under law for these offences is two years.
Earlier, the High Court had quashed the charge of culpable homicide framed by sessions court and referred the case to Magistrate for trial. However, Maharashtra government filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the HC order.
Salman was arrested on September 28, 2002 after he ran over his vehicle on people sleeping outside a bakery in suburban Bandra. One person was killed and four others were injured. He was later released on bail.
 
Salman Case Appeal - TOI: June 06, 2004
A sessions court would hear on June 9 an appeal filed by the Maharashtra government against a lower court order allowing Bandra magistrate to conduct the trial of Bollywood actor Salman Khan in the hit-and-run case.
The appeal would come up for hearing before Principal Judge R R Vachha.
Salman is facing the charge of killing one person and injuring four by ramming his vehicle into a shop in suburban Bandra on September 28, 2002 .
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate R D Gate had earlier rejected the state's petition challenging the jurisdiction of Bandra court to try Salman in the rash-and-negligent driving case. The state had contended that Bandra Magistrate was not competent to conduct the trial. Being aggrieved, the state filed an appeal in a sessions court.
Salman opposed state's appeal through his lawyer Dipesh Mehta saying it was trying to abuse the process of law and delay the trial.
The actor pleaded that the state had not raised the jurisdiction issue when charges were framed against him on October six last year and also when the Supreme Court had directed Bandra Magistrate to try him. It is now challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court
only to delay the trial.
The prosecution urged that Bandra Magistrate S Y Sishode was not competent to conduct the trial as he had earlier recorded statements of three witnesses in this case. Under section 164 CRPC, such a Magistrate had to transfer the case to other court for trial, it argued.
 

1,2

 
 
 

 

 
Copyright © 2010 salmankhan.net. All rights reserved