Salman’s lawyer Amit Desai submitted an application to Justice A.R. Joshi, who directed the government pleader and chief public prosecutor Sandeep Shinde to file the state’s oral or written reply by Tuesday.
“Kamaal Khan’s name was mentioned in the FIR and the charge sheet and yet the prosecution did not examine him as a witness. Even if the prosecution did not examine him, then the learned trial judge should have called for it. Under Section 391 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Bombay High Court can summon a witness,” Desai argued.
Justice Joshi directed that the application must be numbered by the end of Monday, a copy given to the public prosecutor and the state should file its reply by Tuesday when further arguments will continue.
Last month, Desai had argued that the prosecution did not examine star witness Kamaal Khan and Salman’s brother Sohail Khan, which could have thrown light on certain crucial aspects of the September 28, 2002 accident case in Bandra West in which one pavement dweller was killed and four others were injured.
He contended that instead of placing the evidence of police constable and the actor’s bodyguard Ravindra Patil — who died in 2007 — the prosecution should have examined Kamaal Khan and Sohail Khan, as both could have thrown light on drinking, while Kamaal could have given evidence on the drunken driving aspect.
On Patil, who was the first informant and even lodged the FIR on September 28, 2002, Desai said that in his statement, there was no mention of the actor having consumed alcohol and this allegedly came to light on October 1 in Patil’s supplementary statement.
The high court is currently hearing the 49-year-old Salman’s appeal against the five-year sentence awarded to him on May 6 by the Mumbai Sessions Court.