Bombay HC Dismisses Criminal Charges Against Salman Khan And His Bodyguard

MUMBAI: As a result of a complaint made by a journalist in 2019, the Bombay high court on Thursday dismissed criminal proceedings brought by a magistrate court against actor Salman Khan and his bodyguard. 

The journalist claimed that the actor had gotten into a fight with him after he attempted to record and photograph him while he was cycling in Andheri. Khan and his bodyguard's case was considered by a single-judge bench of Justice Bharati Dangre, who questioned whether the complainant had followed the proper procedures before the magistrate court issued the process in connection with his claim of criminal intimidation. 

After the journalist Ashok Pandey complained that Khan had stopped him from taking pictures or videos of him while he was riding a bicycle, the actor's bodyguard allegedly snatched his phone and threatened him. 

The magistrate court ordered Khan to appear. Khan, who was called to appear before the magistrate in April, went to the HC and appealed for the summons and the actions taken against him to be quashed. The summons had earlier been stayed by the HC. 

Senior attorney Aabad Ponda told the bench during Khan's defence that there were procedural flaws because the complaint was not properly verified as required by the Code of Criminal Procedure and that the complainant had improved his complaint before the magistrate. 

As a result, the case should be dismissed, Ponda said. The lawyer representing Pandey had alleged that the actor and his bodyguards had threatened, harassed, and grabbed his phone during the encounter, leaving him frightened when he made the initial police report. 

The summons was quashed and set aside by Judge Dangre because the complaint had been improved and the correct procedure had not been followed when it was issued. When the phone snatching incident happened in 2019, the journalist had reported the actor's security to the authorities for alleged offences.

Thereafter, he went to the magistrate court to ask for guidance on how to file a police report (FIR) against the actor under the IPC's sections 324 (voluntarily causing harm), 392 (robbery), 426 (committing mischief), and 506 (criminal intimidation). 

The magistrate had summoned the actor and ordered him to appear in person, but after the police provided a report, he stated that a case was brought out only under sections 504 and 506 of the IPC.

Also Read: Indore Temple Stepwell Collapses: 7 Trapped 18 Rescued By Officials

Also Watch: