[Sheel]

Err, I don't get what you fine gents are arguing about?

Salman Khan has been proved of driving his LC, under influence over few people.

Accidentally or not? No one does that on purpose, but it is equally wrong to take the wheel under influence, without a valid DL.

But the way judiciary functions in a country like ours, not just lethargy but that, you can influence the decision if you are influential. Salman, might be handed over a sentence, but that is only because the case is highlighted & judiciary wants to set an example.

Else in the badlands, justice for poor will continue to be exploited. Try filing a case against a super influential people in your area. 99% of those times, the FIR won't be launched at the police station. You will have to go to the court for that.

And this is not going to change. If I discuss further, the discussion will go OT, so I chose to leave it here.

You are free to disagree, but don't get hold of my throat for that

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by msdivy

Since you want the answer, I don't think I could have gotten away killing someone. So next best thing is help victims, confess and hope for lesser sentence.

PS: Salman Khan wouldn't have known whether the victims are dead or alive immediately accident. So he made the decision to scout without knowing whether he had killed someone or not.

You dont think you would have got away, so you would have tried to.
That's exactly what he did, tried to get away with it. Its 13 years of trying to get away with it. Now that he hasnt, he's more than willing to help the victims.

Originally Posted by Sheel

Err, I don't get what you fine gents are arguing about?

I think we as a country get into extremes.. worship or "send to hell"
I'm not a fan of Salman's.. dont watch his movies.
Just trying to keep things in perspective, no point bashing him for trying to get away with murder when most of us would have done the same. Its not easy to take a path of accepting going to jail.

[dark.knight]

I'm walking a minefield eitherway but I'll get to the weight of the matter without a single direct mention of the defendant or the prosecutors. Before I do I'd also like to mention that the adage "look at the log in your eyes before you complain of a speck of sawdust in others eyes" is over-played. Its not about what one would do if a hypothetical event happened, its about what happened when a real incident took place.

Basic IRREFUTABLE facts
- It was proven that an accident took place at the said spot at the said time (we know that because the vehicle in question was standing there damaged and the shutter of the shop was also damaged)
- It was proven via multiple witness interrogation the morning of the incident as to the number of people in the car, their identities and their actions.
- It was proven via medical examination that the accused "driver's" blood alcohol content was beyond legal limits. As quoted in news there are physical printed reports of the same.
- No mention was made of "who else" was driving the car by "accused driver" explicitly until recently.
- Various witnesses testifying at first then becoming hostile or not coming to court.

I'm no lawyer but all the above facts are quite bulletproof, why did it take the State Court all of 13 years i.e 4500+ days to arrive to a final verdict? It could've gone either way to the benefit of either party but why 13 years? There still is a HC & SC above this to argue further, so why the delay? Its about the judicial system here. I've no opinion on the actual judgement, it might as well be party X vs party Y but all my life I've seen every citizen of a democracy define law as an equal fair grounds on which a case is argued & resolved. However the 4500 days time taken to announce a judgement by the lowest court tells me that its possible to enable a delaying mechanism within the courts until a case loses steam/witnesses are worn down thus enabling an edge using monetary resources.

Many will say this is untrue but just look at it from a distance without bias. This isn't about hating or loving someone to the extremes, its about a bent legal system. It isn't my opinion - I've merely written what happened. Can't get any more obvious than that.

[Horn-OK-Pls]

Apologies in advance. But I don’t understand what’s the debate.
SK is an Indian citizen. He drove without a DL, which is a crime.
He drove a vehicle under heavy DUI. Plain stupid and also a crime.
He had a driver and still took the wheel while being drunk. Read as “Janta hu main kyon hai”
So as a citizen, he is liable to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The judge (with all due respect to him) gave him 5 as against a maximum of 10 years. Guess, won’t argue, since I have 0 knowledge of the law.
So my friends, what’s the big deal? A guy stupid enough to DUI without a valid DL kills people sleeping on the road got his due. Period.

The legal system :
Well like I said earlier, am not too well versed with the law. But as a lay citizen a couple of points from my end.
- It took 13 years to arrive at this verdict. Seriously? 13 years? Wish we had jobs these kinds of accountability.
- The police very reluctantly took the blood test 8 hours after the incident. Am sure within 8 hours, there are ways and means to getting the blood alcohol levels down to Zero.

SK the Celebrity –
Let me say upfront that am not a fan of SK. Don’t like his films nor his shows. This being said, there are a few points that my fellow BHIian’s mentioned.
- One should not be sleeping on the road – Well its nice to say such things when one had had a stomach full meal and a roof over one’s head. I count my blessings for not being so unfortunate that I have no other place to sleep but the footpath. Anyone else saying otherwise is just being callous IMHO.
- SK is a super star – So big deal
- SK is a ‘nice’ person – Really?
o What does one know of SK to label him as a ‘nice’ person? We all know that has had umpteen issues with drinks. Despite knowing this, he took the wheel and his so called friends riding with him ‘allowed’ it? I wouldn't let a friend who attempting to drive under influence, drive. Will call him a cab. If he still insists, I will call myself a cab.
o SK & women – The less said the better.
o SK is charitable – Really? Let’s take a look at his Being Human Foundation (am not getting into the timing issue knowing that this case would come up for hearing soon). The brand, Being Human, is worth circa 450+ cr. Assuming profitability @ 15% (worst case) we are talking of 50+cr profits. Please do some basic google search and check how many so called “donations” has he done using this foundation.
To summarise – SK got his due. In my opinion too late. He is a liar and has issues with alcohol.

[binand]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

I'm no lawyer but all the above facts are quite bulletproof, why did it take the State Court all of 13 years i.e 4500+ days to arrive to a final verdict?

Firstpost put out an analysis on how this trial dragged on for so long; it is here:

http://www.firstpost.com/living/why-...a-2232020.html

[Kumar R]

Originally Posted by dark.knight

I'm no lawyer but all the above facts are quite bulletproof, why did it take the State Court all of 13 years i.e 4500+ days to arrive to a final verdict? It could've gone either way to the benefit of either party but why 13 years? There still is a HC & SC above this to argue further, so why the delay? Its about the judicial system here.

You're right but the actual trial itself took about a little over a year. It started in March 2014 after many legal battles over whether the Magistrate had the discretion to frame more serious charges than the commonly known 'rash and negligent' driving charge -- which is what salman's lawyer's have been trying to say is the applicable one (as opposed to culpable homicide not amounting to murder -- which is what he has now been convicted of).

Once the magistrate made the determination the case was transferred to the sessions court (which alone can try cases relating to culpable homicide).

But it is a farce that it took 12 years to decide which court could try him. And that the law is ambiguous enough to permit the accused's lawyers to stall for so much time by numerous procedural challenges -- which have nothing to do with the substantive issues of whether or not he was guilty as charged.

Under the circumstances we should compliment the sessions judge for completing the trial and delivering the verdict along with sentencing in such a short time. By comparison the trial of Rajat Gupta with far more complex questions of law and evidence took a mere 4 weeks.

[abhi7992]

A small comparison of SK's case to other high profile DUI cases.

http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2015/05...n_7220000.html

http://www.indiatvnews.com/buzz/mout...reira-134.html

I dont understand the logic behind our judicial system, Someone who kills 7 people is sentenced to 3 years and the person who kills a man is sentenced to 5 years in prison. Where is the equality here? Is SK paying for his celebrity status?

[Hayek]

Originally Posted by abhi7992

I dont understand the logic behind our judicial system, Someone who kills 7 people is sentenced to 3 years and the person who kills a man is sentenced to 5 years in prison. Where is the equality here? Is SK paying for his celebrity status?

The Alistair Pereira case trial was done and appeals exhausted in 3 years. Salman's trial has taken 13 years. He is also already a convicted criminal - he is out on bail after getting a 5 year sentence in 2006 in the Blackbuck case. The appeals process in that case has been on for 7 years. So who is privileged? Shouldn't a person who is already a convicted criminal in one case be given a harsher punishment than someone who is a first time offender? And shouldn't killing someone while driving drunk be punished by more than just 5 years? (Look at my previous post - someone was sentenced to 24 years in Florida for a similar crime). Frankly, our law is too lenient on criminals, especially rich ones. Just because Pereira got off lightly (perhaps not, since he has served his jail term already), why should Salman? Time for Salman Khan's appeals in both this and the Blackbuck case to be heard quickly (within the next 6 months) and if found guilty, he be sent to jail - with sentences to be served consecutively and not concurrently,

[pgsagar]

Justice is not served yet. There is High Court and Supreme Court, he can take recourse of. And if the pace at which this case has so far progressed any indication, then we are looking down 15-20 more years before last word on this case is said by judiciary. He is already out on bail and will go ahead with his shooting schedules while his lawyers will burn midnight oil thinking of new ways to water down the case.

[shashank.nk]

If a person was doing more charity and was 'being human' why then would he try to frame his driver for an offence committed by him ?

I understand that a defendant needs to put up a defense, but when you try to frame an innocent person to escape punishment,it makes me wonder if 'being human' was all media philanthropy to get a lighter punishment.

[prasadee]

Originally Posted by shashank.nk

If a person was doing more charity and was 'being human' why then would he try to frame his driver for an offence committed by him ?.

Just like you I am honestly disgusted by the support he is getting because he has done Charity. I looked up his website beinghumanfoundation.in to see what they have done. I only see links to buying beinghuman merchandise, and news items saying they have made no contributions to Nepal.

For the sake of argument lets say, he has done some real charity. By that account Mr Buffet and Mr Gates should be able to get away with murder! This person was irresponsible and is trying to getaway with a crime. He needs to man up, apologize to the youngsters who see such actors as a role model. Tell them he made a big error in judgement - instead of framing his driver. Sick!

[shashank.nk]

Originally Posted by prasadee

Just like you I am honestly disgusted by the support he is getting because he has done Charity. This person was irresponsible and is trying to getaway with a crime. He needs to man up, apologize to the youngsters who see such actors as a role model. Tell them he made a big error in judgement - instead of framing his driver. Sick!

I'm not surprised or disgusted by all the support he's getting-one of stardom's perks I guess. However, like you I find the 'charity' 'changed man' argument quite absurd.

He was driving under influence,over-speeding,had no valid licence and killed a homeless man who had no place to sleep but the footpath. Its a heinous crime and i'm happy justice has been served,though delayed.

[apachelongbow]

Originally Posted by Anghammarad

Forget people sleeping on the pavements, that's irrelevant to the issue at hand.
He drove.
Drunk.
End of story.
Doesn't matter who he is, and it should not.

That's not the end of the story, infact that is the begining of the whole sordid drama. The actual story was he was dead drunk, couldn't stand up properly, then he drove his SUV at what ever high speed he could manage, on narrow bylanes of a conjested suburb, then lost control, and his SUV actually clambered up 3 stairs to end up on the chest of a poor bakery worker, who were sleeping 25 feet away from the road. Then he got out of the car, saw the horror he had committed, saw the car perched on the prone body of one worker and other injured lying around, decided to run away and hide at home. Then he waited a full 8 hours to ensure his alcohol content was minimal and went to the police station to show that his driver had committed the crime and he was merely a passenger.
For the next 13 years he maintained the same lie in every court session, at the same time pretending to help the aged and poor, may be to salvage what ever little conscience he has, as if his helping someone else makes the entire hitting, running away without helping crime wash away. Pathetic human being pretending to being human, I guess he got what he deserved, may be a little too late and a little too less, but nevertheless!!

[binand]

Originally Posted by abhi7992

I dont understand the logic behind our judicial system, Someone who kills 7 people is sentenced to 3 years and the person who kills a man is sentenced to 5 years in prison. Where is the equality here?

The SC was scathing in its observation in the Alistair Pereira case. Read here (para 79):

http://indiankanoon.org/doc/79026890/

"sentence of three years awarded by the High Court is too meagre and not adequate"

I expect after this sort of language from the SC, no DUI accident+death case in India will escape lightly.

[carwatcher]

Err Sorry, ToI claiming today that Salman claimed with them in an interview that he was not driving and now ToI thinks he was lying.
So shall we take other interviews with a pinch of salt too.
To all die hard SK fans here, if you think its his birthright to get always the positive comments, sorry you all are not living in reality. Wake up to that.
Ignorance is NO excuse in the eyes of law.
Any person driving without DL is liable to be charged with attempt to murder since ages. While at the one hand we complain at our laws are toothless, and if they are applied now we cry it as harsh.
I have seen the trend with media and public that they know well how to play victim card very well.
Dia Mirza has tweeted that his mother is alive today due to SK. But the poor relatives of the person killed by SK can't tweet, otherwise they would've also tweeted that they will never forget that their loved one is no more with them due to SK, so we can choose to ignore it.