2002 hit and run case: Salman Khan's appeal adjourned to April 29
- Parliament LIVE: Expert committee to review use of pellet guns, says Rajnath
- Dalit fury spills over to Gujarat streets, 9 more try to end lives; CM meets family assaulted in Una
- Hit by campus protests, FTII makes new students sign ‘decorum, decency’ affidavit
- Dalits are 'soft target' for cow vigilantes: fact finding team
- Suspicious bag found inside Dubai-Amritsar SpiceJet flight
A court today adjourned till April 29 the appeal filed by Bollywood actor Salman Khan against a magistrate's order invoking the charge of 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' in the 2002 hit-and-run case.
The matter was adjourned as Sessions Judge U B Hejib was on leave.
The 47-year-old actor has contended that the magistrate had erred in invoking the charge of 'culpable homicide not amounting to murder' (Section 304 part II of IPC) in the hit-and-run case. The offence under this section attracts ten year jail and is triable by a sessions court.
Earlier, Khan was tried by a magistrate for lesser charge of causing death by negligence (Section 304A of IPC), that provides for a maximum punishment of two years in jail.
After examining 17 witnesses, the magistrate had come to the conclusion that culpable homicide charge could be made out against the actor and transferred the case to the sessions court for retrial.
Salman Khan has pleaded that the magistrate's order was "erroneous, bad in law and contrary to evidence on record."
The magistrate had failed to appreciate that he (Khan) had neither the intention (to kill people) nor the knowledge that his rash and negligent driving would kill a person and cause injury to four others, he said.
- UN faces a crisis, but its new secretary general is unlikely to upset tradition
- South China Sea verdict has changed the ground rules for future engagement with China
- Empowering women through JAM
- Resolution of citizen grievances is an indicator of the performance of government departments
- Telescope: Grace and the lack of it
- The endeavour for a common civil law must be to end discrimination, and not stamp majority might