Salman Khan's acquittal: India favours those lucky enough to be rich and famous

Nobody killed Nurullah Mehboob Sharif on the night of 28 September, 2002. Perhaps Salman Khan’s white Toyota Land Cruiser that rammed into a bakery in Mumbai, killing Sharif and injuring four others, was on auto-pilot. Maybe, there was no accident that night: Sharif died because of sudden rush of emotions on seeing Bhai and his superstar friends amidst pavement dwellers and others broke their legs in the stampede to get autographs. Or, perhaps, singer Abhijeet was right when he tweeted: “Kutta road pe soyega, road pe marega.” [caption id=“attachment_2540512” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Salman Khan. Firstpost[/caption] Nobody should grudge Salman Khan or his acquittal by the High Court. Did you expect Salman and his lawyers to turn up before the judge, present evidence of the actor’s guilt and seek strict punishment? This wasn’t a film based on Salim-Javed script where the conscientious hero, torn apart by guilty conscience, seeks atonement through strict punishment. No, this wasn’t Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment or Rajesh Khanna’s Dushman; this was just another remake of Andhaa Kanoon where the cops and investigating agencies turned a blind eye to a crime. When the HC says the actor can’t be convicted on the basis of available evidence, in spite of what the common man thinks, it is a damning indictment of the agencies that probed the case. It just shows that yet again, the corrupt, incompetent system made a mockery of justice with its inept handling of a case involving a celebrity. The case was destined to be doomed from the beginning. Some years ago, when the Mumbai cops told the trial court that a case diary and 55 documents related to the case were missing, it had become clear that investigators were not keen to preserve the evidence. As the court has pointed out, the prosecution just couldn’t put together a water-tight case against Salman Khan. It failed to corroborate initial evidence that 62 mg of alcohol was found in the actor’s blood sample. It failed to build on statements of witnesses who claimed to have seen Salman Khan getting down from the driver’s side or those who had seen him get behind the wheel while leaving JW Mariott before the accident. And, let us accept this, Salman Khan has always been lucky with the law. Unlike the common man who faces long trials and sometimes spends a long time in jail while awaiting justice, the actor has had the good fortune of getting away unscathed in spite of several cases, prolonged trials and repeated convictions. Around ten years ago, Salman was sentenced to a year in jail for poaching protected animals in Jodhpur. Some months later, he was sentenced again — this time for five years — in a related case. Earlier this year, when he was given a five-year jail sentence by a trial court in the hit-and-run case, he was immediately granted bail. Before Thursday, Salman Khan was among the privileged few to have spent just a few days behind bars, in spite of three convictions and a combined sentence of 11 years. This time too, he was plain lucky. Ravindra Patil, the only person who could have helped the court get to the truth, died midway through the trial. When the case came up for hearing by the HC, the prosecution did not have the option of addressing some of the loopholes in Patil’s testimony. While assigning important roles in a war, Napoleon would often ask if the General was lucky. Perhaps, Indian lawyers too should read the horoscope of a convict before taking up his case. After all, the roll of the dice in India always favours those fortunate enough to be famous and wealthy.