Salman Khan apologizes for 'mistakenly' giving fake affidavit in poaching case


Salman Khan apologizes for 'mistakenly' giving fake affidavit in poaching case

GENERAL OVERVIEW

  • Bollywood actor Salman Khan on 9th February, Tuesday, apologized for 'mistakenly' submitting a false affidavit in the Jodhpur Session Court back in 2003, during his hearing in a case in regard to the poaching of two Black Bucks in Jodhpur in 1998.
  • Salman Khan appeared in the case hearing through Video Conferencing, while his lawyer, Mr. Hastimal Saraswat, informed the court that the actor should be forgiven for 'mistakenly” submitting a wrong affidavit on 8th August, 2003.
  • While the hearing was in progress, Mr. Hastimal said 'The affidavit was mistakenly given on August 8, 2003, as Salman had forgotten that his license was given for renewal because he was too busy. Therefore, he mentioned that the license had gone missing in the court.”

WHAT IS THIS ISSUE ABOUT?

  • Salman was arrested in 1998 for killing two Black Bucks in Jodhpur. Back in the day, the Court registered a case against him in accordance to the Arms Act and the Court asked him to submit his Arms License.
  • Salman submitted an affidavit stating that he lost his license, along with an FIR in the Bandra Police Station but later it came to light that the license was not lost but in the process for renewal.
  • In 2018, a trial court had convicted Salman on the same case and awarded a sentence of not less than five years, the actor had then challenged the verdict in the sessions court. While the other actors, present on the scene were acquitted. 

WHAT COULD BE THE CONSEQUENCES? 

  • It is a known fact that Bhavani Singh, a public prosecutor, had already demanded a case for misleading the court, against the actor.
  • In the verdict of Mahesh Tiwari Vs, State of UP, it has been vividly stated that 'Section 191 deals with evidence on oath and Section 192 with fabricating false affidavits; the offence under Section 191 IPC is constituted by swearing falsely when one is bound by oath to state the truth because a declaration made under an oath”. Therefore, the particular section could act as a predicament for the actor.
  • Given the circumstances, the actor could face a number of charges while recovering from the previous ones, the advocate should have taken care of the consequences before-hand. 

WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ON THIS? IS SALMAN INNOCENT? OR IS HE TRYING TO MISLEAD THE COURT BY SHOWING UP WITH FALSE EVIDENCE? LET US KNOW IN THE COMMENTS!! 

"Loved reading this piece by Sashwat?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Click here to join our Telegram group.

Tags :

 
Published in Others
Source : ,
Views : 523








×

Menu

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Forensics & Evidence     |    x