Salman Khan's appeal hearing continues to drag on in court with a lot of the same evidence being rehashed. In a recent court appearance, Khan's attorney continued to stress that his client was neither driving the SUV that plowed into the bakery, killing a homeless person sleeping on the sidewalk near the bakery and injuring four others, nor was he drunk.
Khan's lawyer also questioned the validity of the testimony given by the police bodyguard attached to him, Ravindra Patil. This via DNA India, "'Such a piece of evidence should be discarded as it did not have any evidential value,' argued advocate, Amit Desai, in the high court, which is hearing an appeal filed by Salman against the five-year sentence awarded to him by the trial court on May 6."
The Bajrangi Bhaijaan is out on bond while the tangled mess that has became the trial is sorted out. Khan's lawyers have held fast in their assertions that their client was not the one driving the vehicle at the time the accident took place. This from the Indian Express web site, "There was no evidence to prove that Salman Khan had taken drinks and was driving the car on the day in 2002 when it rammed into a bakery in suburban Bandra, killing one and injuring four, his lawyer argued in the Bombay High Court."
At this point in time, it appears any decision made by the appeals court will be arbitrary at best, and met with skepticism. The events and truth of that night and the culpable people have been lost in the avalanche of police incompetence and judicial folly. Khan's guilt or culpability at this point have become less important than the fact that the trial continues to drag on. A human being is dead, a man's career may be forever tarnished and the Indian judicial system still can't make up its mind one way or the other.
© 2024 Classicalite All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
