The Bombay High Court began dictation of the verdict in the 2002 hit-and-run case involving Bollywood hero Salman Khan and observed that the FIR was silent on the issue of “drunkenness” of the actor, which cannot be considered as “minor.”

“The FIR is silent on the issue of the drunkenness of the appellant…This ommission of witness cannot be considered as minor,” observed Justice A R Joshi in the open court during the dictation of the judgement.

“The issue of drunkeness of Salman Khan has to be critically examined as the evidence of those injured in the accident is not devoid of minor discrepancies,” Justice Joshi said.

The court is expected to conclude the verdict this week in the appeal filed by Khan against five-year imprisonment awarded to him by a Mumbai sessions court on May 6 this year.

The Judge said that the prosecution witness PW-3 i.e. Mannu Khan had testified that it appeared to him that Salman was drunk because he fell down twice after getting down from the car at the accident spot, then got up and left the place.

Justice Joshi observed that “it appears that the first informant (Ravindra Patil) has lost sight of this when he filed the FIR as it does not mention the word ‘alcohol’.

Moreover, PW-3 i.e Mannu Khan, has been examined 12 years after the incident. He (PW-3) has to be viewed in juxtaposition with the FIR, the Judge said.

Salman challenged the sessions court verdict which had sentenced the actor to five years imprisonment on IPC charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder, saying the trial court had erred in trying him for this offence.

The Judge said he will give a ruling on applicability of culpable homicide charge against Salman and also on other key questions like the admissibility of a statement made by the actor’s former bodyguard (before a magistrate) Ravindra Patil as evidence under section 33 of Indian Evidence Act.

Salman contended that the charge of culpable homicide was not justified and wrongly invoked in the case. He also challenged the prosecution’s step of relying upon Patil’s statement in the trial court, saying this witness died and hence was not available for cross-examination.

The prosecution opposed Salman’s plea and justified invocation of culpable homicide charge against the actor, saying he had driven the car recklessly under the influence of liquor on September 28, 2002, when he met with a mishap in which one person was killed and 4 others were injured.

During the course of the judgement, the Judge said he would also scrutinise other important issues including whether the deceased had been killed due to the impact of the car mishap or whether the car dropped off the hook of a crane, called to remove it, and fell accidentally on the victim.

The Shiv Sena on Monday demanded the resignation of Maharashtra Advocate General Shrihari Aney for propounding the cause of a separate Vidarbha state, even as pro-Vidarbha groups rushed to his support.

Sena MP Sanjay Raut made the demand while reacting to Aney’s statement seeking a referendum on the sensitive issue.

Aney stuck to his stand by saying he respected the Sena sentiments, but what he had stated was “historically correct”.

He said legislators have a right to raise issues in the assembly and even (Shiv Sena) could raise it, though Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis sought to downplay the matter.

On Sunday, speaking at a function to release his book, `Vidarbha Gatha` (Vidarbha Saga), Aney asked for a referendum on the issue and said if 51 percent people vote in favour, the centre must carve out a separate Vidarbha from Maharashtra.

Aney — grandson of former Congress MP and pro-Vidarbha campaigner — expressed confidence that more than 80 percent of the people in the region would vote in favour (of Vidarbha) and that is why the centre was reluctant to take it up.

Endorsing Aney, senior Congress leader and moving spirit behind Vidarbha Rajya Andolan Samiti (VRAS) Vikram Bokey said that in a mini-referendum conducted last year in Akola, Amravati, Bhandara, Chandrapur, Nagpur and Yavatmal, 97 percent of the respondents voted in favour of separate state.

“The 2.50 crore people of Vidarbha strongly feel that the region has faced the brunt of stepmotherly treatment by non-Vidarbha leaders and parties. On behalf of our top activists Shriniwas Khandawale, Wamanrao Chatap, Ram Newale and others, we urged the Bharatiya Janata Party to implement its election promises and immediately carve out a separate Vidarbha,” Bokey said.

Criticising Aney`s statement, Congress senior leader in Council Sanjay Dutt asked: “How can a Constitutional authority like the advocate-general representing the entire state, demanding its splitting and making a separate Vidarbha?”

Aney pointed out that several referendums by NGOs and other groups, have indicated the pro-Vidarbha sentiments clearly, local bar associations in all 11 districts there have passed unanimous resolutions favouring Vidarbha.

Bokey added that the nature and mindset of the people there is different and “they feel that their unique identity will be protected in a separate state”.

A special TADA court on Monday began hearing final arguments in the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts case against seven accused, including extradited gangster Abu Salem, facing trial for their alleged role.

“The court has started hearing the final arguments in the case from Monday,” special public prosecutor Deepak Salvi said.

The seven accused — Salem, Mustafa Dosa, Karimullah Khan, Firoz Abdul Rashid Khan, Riyaz Siddiqui, Tahir Merchant and Abdul Qayyum — are facing trial before Special Judge G A Sanap.

The special court in August had completed recording the statements of the accused under the provisions of section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, under which an accused is given an opportunity to personally explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him.

Later, the court recorded the statements of defence witnesses called by the accused.

Thirteen powerful blasts had rocked the metropolis on March 12, 1993, in which 257 people were killed, while 713 others were injured.

The TADA court in 2006 had convicted 100 accused in connection with the case. The trial of the seven accused was separated from the main trial as they were arrested at the time of conclusion of the trial.