2002 hit-and-run case: Evidence against Salman Khan 'fabricated', says defence lawyer

Mumbai: The defence commenced final arguments in the 2002 hit-and-run case involving actor Salman Khan, lambasting the prosecution for “manufacturing evidence” to “falsely implicate the actor due to pressure on senior police officers” and claiming that Salman’s late bodyguard Ravindra Patil had lied in his statement.

Defence lawyer Shrikant Shivade said before judge D.W. Deshpande that Mr Patil’s evidence had been tendered at the fag-end of the trial to create prejudice against the accused. Mr Shivade said that apart from four or five witnesses who said that there were about four occupants in the car at the time of the accident, there were several independent witnesses who could have proved the same and the investigating officer was not so dumb to have not recorded their statements. However, since these statements were going against the prosecution’s theory, they were purposely not included in the charge sheet and select witnesses were brought before the court, he said.

Mr Shivade alleged that the prosecution did not record the statement of Yogesh Kadam, the staffer who took charge of Salman’s car while it was in the parking lot of the J.W. Marriot Hotel. Mr Shivade said that Mr Kadam was the best person to say who was driving the car, however, the prosecution chose to examine Kalpesh Verma, who had not seen who was driving the car and hence, there was no direct evidence to show that Salman was driving the car.

Mr Shivade stressed on the missing tag of the parking lot which would have shown details like the car number, the name of the driver, the name of the valet and that of the person handing the car back. He said that the tag would have shown the driver’s name, however, it was not produced before the court. Another point argued by him was that the door of the car was closed when Salman was in the driver’s seat because they did not want their car’s door to block the path while they were waiting for the driver to come. One more reason to close the door was that the car’s air-conditioner was on. Mr Shivade will continue arguments on April 15 while the prosecution will submit written arguments on April 13.