MUMBAI: Bollywood’s one and only bad boy Salman Khan seems to be entangled in a fresh legal controversy- for alleged contempt of court.
According to one social activist- Hemant Patil- the website www. salmankhanfiles.com launched by the megastar Salman Khan recently, posts information regarding the 2002 hit-and-run case in which Khan was allegedly involved.
2002 hit-and-run case recap:
On 28 September, 2002, Salman Khan allegedly rammed his SUV into a bakery in the suburb of Bandra in the wee hours of the morning, killing one person and injuring four others.
On 24 June, 2013, the order of sessions judge UB Hejib, promulgated that Salman should be retried for the graver charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the 2002 hit-and-run case. Earlier, the actor was to be tried by Bandra metropolitan magistrate court for a lesser charge of rash and negligent act causing death, under section 304 A of IPC. The charge is punishable with two years’ imprisonment.
From July 19 onwards, Salman Khan’s case would be tried under section 304 (ii) of the IPC, which carries a maximum punishment of 10 years in jail.
Hemant Patil’s complaint:
Hemant Patil filed a complaint against Khan, and posed the question: “When the case is underway and matter sub-judice, how can he use Internet to spread information about the proceedings?” according to his lawyer Wajid Khan.
The hit-and-run case is still an ongoing one, and Patil’s complaint states that Salman Khan is using the internet to disseminate information about the court proceedings and inviting comments from the general public when his hit-and-run case and other cases are still sub judice.
Such a move is in violation of the ‘Contempt of Courts Act, 1971’, added Patil’s complaint.
Patil also added that since the Bandra police station refused to register a complaint against the actor in this regard, the activist then decided to approach the magistrate’s court.
Hemant Patil also alluded to the case of Anuja Prabhudesai v/s State of Goa. In that previous case, the court had reportedly made certain observations to maintain the dignity of the court.
The magistrate has accepted Mr Patil’s complaint and scheduled it for hearing on August 5.
