Eleven years after actor Salman Khan rammed into pavement dwellers near American Express Bakery in Bandra, he was finally charged for culpable homicide not amounting to murder on July 24, setting stage for the trial. However, the case has seen many twists and turns, which include a prime witness turning hostile, going missing and later dying, as well as compensation amount being denied to a victim. Here’s an account of the case so far and why it has taken over 11 years to start the trial.

The accident
Salman, who is already facing trial in the black buck poaching case, allegedly ran his Landcruiser in an inebriated state over a group of pavement dwellers in Bandra in the early hours of September 28, 2002. According to earlier reports, Salman had fled the spot after the accident and surrendered only after eight hours. His father Salim Khan had vehemently denied that Salman fled the scene and has repeatedly expressed displeasure over the accident case being referred to as a “hit and-run” case.

Bail for `950
Salman was arrested by the Bandra police from a friend’s residence at Almeida Park nearby and subsequently released by the police after he furnished a bail of `950 in September 2002. However, in May 2003, the sessions court held Salman prima facie guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the hit-and-run case and rejected his plea to drop the charge and framed 10 charges against him.
The actor had pleaded not guilty to all of them and subsequently, challenged Section 304 part II of the IPC, under which he was charged in the Bombay high court. The charges were later modified and dropped.

Deceased did not get compensation
The Bombay high court, while hearing a PIL on October 7, 2002, had directed Salman Khan to pay `19 lakh as compensation to the victims within two weeks. This included `10 lakh to the family of the deceased. The Khan family had deposited the compensation amount with the court. However, while the other victims got their compensation, one deceased’s family was unable to receive it due to lack of an identification proof.

Witness turned hostile
Salman’s police bodyguard Ravindra Patil had deposed in 2006 saying that Salman was at the wheel and he was drunk. He further said that he had asked the actor not to drink that night as it could prove dangerous, while driving, but Salman did not pay heed to his advice. In the midst of trial, Patil went missing. Subseq-uently, he was arrested in March 2006 for not reporting to duty. He subsequently changed his statement, and was declared a hostile witness by the prosecution.
He was sacked from the force in November 2006. He died of tuberculosis at a city hospital in 2007.
Sixty-four witnesses testified before the court, and ultimately it was proved that it was Salman, who was driving the vehicle.

‘He had knowledge he could kill, injure’
In March 2011, the prosecution filed an application in the magistrate’s court to enhance the charges levelled against Salman. In 2012, the police had sought that Salman be tried for a more serious charge of “culpable homicide not amounting to murder”. Additional chief metropolitan magistrate V. S. Patil in his January 31, 2013 order observed that Salman was warned by his police bodyguard Patil not to drive at a speed of 90 to 100 km per hour as there was a turning ahead. The actor, however, did not pay any heed to his advice.

Rejection of appeal
After the SC directive that the offence is triable by the sessions judge, the sessions court on June 24, 2013 ruled that the offence of “culpable homicide not amounting to murder” under IPC holds against Salman and rejected his appeal challenging a magistrate’s order invoking this charge. Pronou-ncing the order, Judge U.B. Hejib ruled that Salman would face the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and would be tried for the same. The court on July 24 framed charges against him for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

May face 10 years behind bars
If convicted under the charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder Salman might have to face up to 10 years of jail.